Oh you guys at The Broke and the Bookish- why must you taunt me with the reminder that I'm not going to have a Thanksgiving feast? My ancestors stayed in the motherland (one of the motherlands?) so I can't really partake in all the turkey and pumpkin pie and whatever else you have on Thanksgiving. This is clearly unfair, even though I don't really like turkey or pie, and I wanna have a nice dinner and a long weekend of work and school (I'm unemployed right now, so I obviously mean retroactively and in the future). And you know what? When you're having your lovely dinners and stuff on Thursday, I have a hospital appointment where my poor wisdom teeth will probably be poked at and made ouchie, and maybe told of their last day in my mouth. So just think about that, yeah? Stupid ancestors...
Anyway, having had that giant moan, here are some authors I'd invite to my theoretical Thanksgiving feast. Hopefully they'd all get along and laugh at my jokes, because that's really all I need in terms of approval from others...
Top Ten Authors I'd Love To Have at my Thanksgiving Feast
1. Harper Lee- Not only does she rock, but she's so elusive! Inviting her to my thanksgiving feast would be the perfect way to bring her out of hiding and this could be my only chance to ask her things and worship her in person!
2. Stephen King- Well, obviously. I mean, I'd probably be happy with a feast involving only me and Stephen King. Oh, the things we could talk about!
3. Naomi Klein- Naomi is my homegirl- and by my homegirl, I obviously mean that we had a teeny conversation on twitter that made this guy I worked with really jealous because he sort of thinks she's awesome too. But aside from that, she literally seems to have the exact same political, economic etc opinions as me, and I think we could put the world to rights together!
4. Nora Ephron- She's hilarious and I love her. I need no other reason, right?
5. John Steinbeck- Nobody said whether it was a 'dead or alive' kind of list, because if this isn't a magic thanksgiving feast, then I'm going to have a corpsey smell in my (non-existant) dining room for days. Let's just assume there is magic, so I can invite Steinbeck because I seriously love him and would have his babies. And he's awesome.
6. Margaret Atwood- Because she's seriously awesome, not just in her writing, but in person too- I saw her on this BBC book night thing once, and she seemed really fun, but also super super smart. She's just great.
7. Jane Austen- She'd probably be freaked out by about 95% of my choices of conversation (imagine a twelve year old boy's conversations, and you won't be far off) but she'd still be really witty and funny and say really insightful things about modern times, I'm sure.
8. Jeffrey Eugenides- Because I didn't get to see him when he was doing this talk thing in London because I went to see Red Hot Chili Peppers instead (SO worth it) and in order to get my chance to see him in the flesh, I think he's got to have an invite to my feast! Also, maybe he can teach me to write really really well (which kind of goes for everyone on my list, I guess)
9. Tony Kushner- I have a feeling he'd be awesome, and I love Angels in America so so so much that I could probably keep him entertained with flattery (read: sycophantism) throughout the entire feast. I'd kind of rather invite Prior Walter, but since he's a fictional character and all, I'd settle for his creator!
10. Julie Powell- Because, of all the authors I've read so far this year, she seems like the one most like me, and the one I could most have a laugh with. Added bonus- she can cook.
And, that'll be my feast. Aren't you just dying to come? In the comments, little American lovelies, howsabout you tell me how you do Thanksgiving at your house, because as a foreigner who only really has Thanksgiving episodes of various American sitcoms to go on, I really want to know! Does everyone eat turkey? Are there presents? Do you just eat and watch tv all day? I really am dying to find out!
Tuesday, 22 November 2011
Monday, 21 November 2011
Devouring Books: Notes From A Big Country by Bill Bryson
Bill Bryson is one of those authors whose books I have collected almost unconsciously, until I've got about 6 of the buggers when all I've actually read by him is his Shakespeare biography (which I read because of Shakespeare, rather than Bryson). Because of this, I was kind of apprehensive to read any of his books, in case I didn't like one, and found that I'd been clinging onto the rest for no good reason at all, and then, you know, who elses name would I confusingly search for in charity shops when mindlessly buying books?! (I realise this entire paragraph makes me sound like a crazy person, so you can probably just ignore it).
Anyway, so I did read this book, and OMG how funny is Bryson?! I mean, I think he was relatively funny in his Shakespeare biography (which I really need to read again because I know it was really really good) but with this book I was literally laughing out loud, and let's face it, anyone who says that on the internet is usually lying. I think I was the literal target audience for the book, a collection of columns about how strange America and Americans are that were originally published in an English newspaper, and they really spoke to me, you know? Bryson is in the peculiar position of having grown up in America but also having lived in England for about 20 years, and so he is the perfect person to both appeal to English audiences, whilst also being able to comment on American idiosyncrasies and oddities.
Now, if you've ever been here before, you'll know that I love America in terms of its physical land, and the culture(s) and the cities and a lot of the lovely people, but there are a few pre-conceptions that English people hold about Americans that Bryson is very aware of, and knows exactly how to play on in the perfect way. By this, I mean that he is never really mean, or cruel, but kind of gently teasing about the American way of life as he sees it, and alongside this, he's also gently mocking of himself; which makes the mocking of anything else so much easier to take. He gets the most passionate and angry at things which he thinks are the most important (for example, in calling the Death Penalty idiotic, or preferring free healthcare to, say, free water in restaurants [which, by the way, we do have over here, it's just that you have to ask for it!]). It's about as perfect a set of columns as you can read if you're in my position, in that he makes English people seem overly enlightened about things, whilst also not being mean about Americans. In most cases, Bryson is the one who ends up kind of taking the position of the fool, which I think is the way we all prefer it.
Although these columns were originally published in the late 90s, I think there are still many things in there that are still relevant and still being talked about today, not least the whole free healthcare thing, or the reliance Americans have on their conveniences, one of Bryson's favourite topics. The most dated are the ones where he talks about 'modern' technology, where he complains about how difficult it is to set up a computer and things like that, and it's quite hard to relate to these chapters because, you know, you get your MacBook out of the box, turn it on and you're kind of ready to go... But, on the whole, they're still funny and who doesn't need a bit of laughter in their lives? I'm also not sure if this book is quite as relevant to Americans as it is to, say, me, but I think that, if someone had written a book outlining the idiosyncrasies of British life (as I'm sure someone has) I think it would still appeal to me, and I might even find it funnier than someone not from the UK. Americans, take note!
About the only thing I can't agree with Bryson with is when he says Americans aren't funny, mainly because he provides so much evidence himself to the contrary! Read this book and expect to laugh- you won't be at all disappointed. I wasn't, and I'm excited to read my other, ooh, 5 Bryson books that I've had for years and never read. Yay for planning ahead and knowing I would love him!
Note: Shout out to Alley, another funny American for recommending this book to me!
Anyway, so I did read this book, and OMG how funny is Bryson?! I mean, I think he was relatively funny in his Shakespeare biography (which I really need to read again because I know it was really really good) but with this book I was literally laughing out loud, and let's face it, anyone who says that on the internet is usually lying. I think I was the literal target audience for the book, a collection of columns about how strange America and Americans are that were originally published in an English newspaper, and they really spoke to me, you know? Bryson is in the peculiar position of having grown up in America but also having lived in England for about 20 years, and so he is the perfect person to both appeal to English audiences, whilst also being able to comment on American idiosyncrasies and oddities.
Now, if you've ever been here before, you'll know that I love America in terms of its physical land, and the culture(s) and the cities and a lot of the lovely people, but there are a few pre-conceptions that English people hold about Americans that Bryson is very aware of, and knows exactly how to play on in the perfect way. By this, I mean that he is never really mean, or cruel, but kind of gently teasing about the American way of life as he sees it, and alongside this, he's also gently mocking of himself; which makes the mocking of anything else so much easier to take. He gets the most passionate and angry at things which he thinks are the most important (for example, in calling the Death Penalty idiotic, or preferring free healthcare to, say, free water in restaurants [which, by the way, we do have over here, it's just that you have to ask for it!]). It's about as perfect a set of columns as you can read if you're in my position, in that he makes English people seem overly enlightened about things, whilst also not being mean about Americans. In most cases, Bryson is the one who ends up kind of taking the position of the fool, which I think is the way we all prefer it.
Although these columns were originally published in the late 90s, I think there are still many things in there that are still relevant and still being talked about today, not least the whole free healthcare thing, or the reliance Americans have on their conveniences, one of Bryson's favourite topics. The most dated are the ones where he talks about 'modern' technology, where he complains about how difficult it is to set up a computer and things like that, and it's quite hard to relate to these chapters because, you know, you get your MacBook out of the box, turn it on and you're kind of ready to go... But, on the whole, they're still funny and who doesn't need a bit of laughter in their lives? I'm also not sure if this book is quite as relevant to Americans as it is to, say, me, but I think that, if someone had written a book outlining the idiosyncrasies of British life (as I'm sure someone has) I think it would still appeal to me, and I might even find it funnier than someone not from the UK. Americans, take note!
About the only thing I can't agree with Bryson with is when he says Americans aren't funny, mainly because he provides so much evidence himself to the contrary! Read this book and expect to laugh- you won't be at all disappointed. I wasn't, and I'm excited to read my other, ooh, 5 Bryson books that I've had for years and never read. Yay for planning ahead and knowing I would love him!
Note: Shout out to Alley, another funny American for recommending this book to me!
Friday, 18 November 2011
Devouring Books: How To Be A Woman by Caitlin Moran
Other than The Marriage Plot, this is the most over-hyped book of my year, mainly thanks to the lovely Frances (read her review here because it's much better than mine is going to be) and her continual telling me how awesome it is, and how much I'd love Caitlin Moran, and just generally, READ IT READ IT READ IT. She even lent me the book to read, even if I did have to gently pry it from her fingers to get it. So, because I'm not really one for hype, even when it's from a person that I love and trust, I kind of thought How To Be A Woman couldn't possibly be as good as I was told it was, and even though I was excited to read it, I didn't really think it would be the BEST. THING. EVER.
Turns out, I'm an idiot, because BEST. THING. EVER. pretty much covers how I feel about this book. I'm well aware that I'll probably say this about 50 million times in the next week about different things, but I really really mean it about this book. Caitlin Moran completely rocks. She doesn't just rock a bit and then fizzle out later, she rocks and then continues to rock continuously throughout her entire book. How To Be A Woman is part memoir, part feminist manifesto, all awesome; and if that sounds dry and appalling to you then you obviously haven't read it because I was laughing about 65% of the time when I was reading it, and the rest of the time I was contemplating and thinking deeply and still giggling a tiny bit inside my head.
The best thing about How To Be A Woman though, I think, is that Moran is fearless- she's not afraid to write about things people never discuss, and for that I utterly love her, and as well as that she writes about the 'hot feminist topics' (I'm basically thinking abortion here people) but in a sensible, never boring way, and actually discusses some things I hadn't really considered before. I also loved the consecutive chapters 'Why you should have children' and 'Why you shouldn't have children', with the former basically being, you know, 'I have children and I love them and they are really fab', but then the latter being 'women so need to catch up with men, and great as children are, they do tend to hold women back career-wise, and so there's nothing wrong with deciding not to have children and I'll even applaud you if you don't'. I thought this was wonderful- a truly balanced look at whether or not one should have children, with the ultimate conclusion not being some kind of prescriptive statement, but more a 'do whatever you want as long as it makes you happy.' In other words, perfection.
I don't agree with Caitlin Moran on everything though (and that's ok, and, you know, I don't think she expects anyone to either) and her love of Germaine Greer upsets me a bit, even though, as she says, there are things that she doesn't agree with Germaine Greer on too, and in spite of that still holds her up as her feminist hero. Right now, Caitlin Moran is my feminist hero, and it's ok that I disagree with her on some things because I still love her anyway. (See what I did there?)
So did How To Be A Woman teach me how to be a woman? I kind of knew how to do that already, but I feel so enriched by reading this book that I feel like I can do it a lot better now! One of the main facets of the book is that, if everyone just had better manners, then we could all get along better, and there would be so many things that women wouldn't even have to think about, and I just think that's so true. I mean, sexual harassment? Bad manners. Commenting on things that are completely irrelevant to say, a work situation and that you'd never comment on with a man? Bad manners. Everyone just needs to learn themselves some manners, and we'd all be a lot better off. Moran, when there's a revolution, I'm so joining your army.
I feel like there's so much more I want to say about How To Be A Woman, but all my words are kind of inadequate. I know there are so many quotes from it that I loved but didn't write down because I read most of the book in a day's rush and I didn't want to stop because it's just that good. I do just want to give a shout out to Moran's sister Caz, who is utterly awesome and who I hope to be as cool as someday! You obviously now all need to read the book and we can discuss it and be all brilliant and feministy and, you know, take over the world. Until then though, please excuse me while I read the book again, before Frances has to snatch it back from my extremely possessive grip...
Turns out, I'm an idiot, because BEST. THING. EVER. pretty much covers how I feel about this book. I'm well aware that I'll probably say this about 50 million times in the next week about different things, but I really really mean it about this book. Caitlin Moran completely rocks. She doesn't just rock a bit and then fizzle out later, she rocks and then continues to rock continuously throughout her entire book. How To Be A Woman is part memoir, part feminist manifesto, all awesome; and if that sounds dry and appalling to you then you obviously haven't read it because I was laughing about 65% of the time when I was reading it, and the rest of the time I was contemplating and thinking deeply and still giggling a tiny bit inside my head.
The best thing about How To Be A Woman though, I think, is that Moran is fearless- she's not afraid to write about things people never discuss, and for that I utterly love her, and as well as that she writes about the 'hot feminist topics' (I'm basically thinking abortion here people) but in a sensible, never boring way, and actually discusses some things I hadn't really considered before. I also loved the consecutive chapters 'Why you should have children' and 'Why you shouldn't have children', with the former basically being, you know, 'I have children and I love them and they are really fab', but then the latter being 'women so need to catch up with men, and great as children are, they do tend to hold women back career-wise, and so there's nothing wrong with deciding not to have children and I'll even applaud you if you don't'. I thought this was wonderful- a truly balanced look at whether or not one should have children, with the ultimate conclusion not being some kind of prescriptive statement, but more a 'do whatever you want as long as it makes you happy.' In other words, perfection.
I don't agree with Caitlin Moran on everything though (and that's ok, and, you know, I don't think she expects anyone to either) and her love of Germaine Greer upsets me a bit, even though, as she says, there are things that she doesn't agree with Germaine Greer on too, and in spite of that still holds her up as her feminist hero. Right now, Caitlin Moran is my feminist hero, and it's ok that I disagree with her on some things because I still love her anyway. (See what I did there?)
So did How To Be A Woman teach me how to be a woman? I kind of knew how to do that already, but I feel so enriched by reading this book that I feel like I can do it a lot better now! One of the main facets of the book is that, if everyone just had better manners, then we could all get along better, and there would be so many things that women wouldn't even have to think about, and I just think that's so true. I mean, sexual harassment? Bad manners. Commenting on things that are completely irrelevant to say, a work situation and that you'd never comment on with a man? Bad manners. Everyone just needs to learn themselves some manners, and we'd all be a lot better off. Moran, when there's a revolution, I'm so joining your army.
I feel like there's so much more I want to say about How To Be A Woman, but all my words are kind of inadequate. I know there are so many quotes from it that I loved but didn't write down because I read most of the book in a day's rush and I didn't want to stop because it's just that good. I do just want to give a shout out to Moran's sister Caz, who is utterly awesome and who I hope to be as cool as someday! You obviously now all need to read the book and we can discuss it and be all brilliant and feministy and, you know, take over the world. Until then though, please excuse me while I read the book again, before Frances has to snatch it back from my extremely possessive grip...
Thursday, 17 November 2011
Devouring Books: The Marriage Plot by Jeffrey Eugenides
In a way, this year has been all about a developing relationship between me and Eugenides. All the way back in January, I read The Virgin Suicides and was exceedingly underwhelmed by it (that's a nice way of saying I hated it) and I kind of thought that was it for Eugenides and me. Over before we'd even begun. But then, something strange happened. In April, I read Middlesex, and oh how I loved it! I loved it so much that I didn't know what to do with myself after I'd read it, and everything I'd felt about The Virgin Suicides became completely irrelevant. I hardly even thought they were written by the same person, to be perfectly honest, and so I fell in love with Eugenides. Fortunately for me, I fell in love with him in a year when only his third novel ever was being released, and hence I can say, with great pleasure, that I read all his works in one year!
I was hoping (in the few minutes I remembered The Virgin Suicides was by Eugenides) for a book that was a lot more like Middlesex than The Virgin Suicides from The Marriage Plot, and what I got, refreshingly, was something entirely different again. I sense that Eugenides likes to change things up a lot, and I love that about him. In The Marriage Plot, I got something which I actually wasn't expecting- a book I liked even better than Middlesex. This was probably just down to the fact that The Marriage Plot most fits with my own experiences (I actually felt like I could relate to Madeline, Mitchell and Leonard at different times, which connected me to all three of the primary characters) and I just love love loved it. I almost loved it so much that I can't think of anything at all intelligent to say about it- I just want all to read it and love it and cherish it above all else.
But let's try to say some intelligent things, shall we? Well, I'd read part of this book without realising it, because in, I think, the summer fiction edition of The New Yorker, there was a 'short story' by Eugenides (which was totally exciting because I was all Middlesex-loving and excited for The Marriage Plot) that was actually a section from this book (if anyone's interested, it's the section where Mitchell's working at the hospital in India). So I was reading it and I thought I was going mental, because it seemed so familiar to me, and yet I couldn't have read it because this book is brand new! It was all very odd, but then I thought about where I could possibly have read it before, remembered my whole New Yorker subscription and then found the 'short story' in said issue. All I have to say about this is that 1) I'm kind of irritated at The New Yorker for not, you know, making Eugenides write a short story OR for not sort of at least saying it was adapted from his new novel; but also 2) it is a section extremely well suited to turning into a short story, with just a few mentions of Madeleine omitted. It also made me think that, actually, all the sections could definitely be read independently as well as a whole book, because there are only a few threads that run through them which relate to the stories of others, which is kind of how life is too, you know? (Watch me get all deep!)
You might have noticed that I've written like three paragraphs without telling you anything about the plot or anything much at all really, and that's mainly because, if you just hear about the plot in a simplistic way, it sounds kind of lame. Because, essentially, The Marriage Plot is about a love triangle, and oh my GOD, haven't we had enough of those? But then really, it's not about that at all- it's about three people, and two men who happen to love the same girl, and this girl only loves one of them, but actually she doesn't really know who she is or what she wants yet because she's only 22, for goodness sake! I can wholly relate, apart from the bit where two men are in love with me. I think, far more interesting than the 'love triangle' are the parts where these really young people are figuring out who they are, and learning a lot more than they expected.
I've read some criticism that Eugenides doesn't know how to write women and I don't think that's true at all (I think it was true in The Virgin Suicides, but not anymore), and, in fact, I think he writes people about as well as any author I've read. His characters don't just sit there dully on the page, they live and breathe and kind of exist as much as any characters have. Everything about them seems genuine and honest and just a realistic depiction of how people actually are. I mean, I could be wrong and I might just have found a writer who somehow seems to have gotten specifically inside my head, but I think his appeal is more universal than that, and, you know, everyone should read his books, basically!
So yeah, The Marriage Plot. I've spent my time rambling about it, now I recommend that you spend some time actually reading it because it's so wonderful and complex and the characters so alive that you'd be a fool not to.
I was hoping (in the few minutes I remembered The Virgin Suicides was by Eugenides) for a book that was a lot more like Middlesex than The Virgin Suicides from The Marriage Plot, and what I got, refreshingly, was something entirely different again. I sense that Eugenides likes to change things up a lot, and I love that about him. In The Marriage Plot, I got something which I actually wasn't expecting- a book I liked even better than Middlesex. This was probably just down to the fact that The Marriage Plot most fits with my own experiences (I actually felt like I could relate to Madeline, Mitchell and Leonard at different times, which connected me to all three of the primary characters) and I just love love loved it. I almost loved it so much that I can't think of anything at all intelligent to say about it- I just want all to read it and love it and cherish it above all else.
But let's try to say some intelligent things, shall we? Well, I'd read part of this book without realising it, because in, I think, the summer fiction edition of The New Yorker, there was a 'short story' by Eugenides (which was totally exciting because I was all Middlesex-loving and excited for The Marriage Plot) that was actually a section from this book (if anyone's interested, it's the section where Mitchell's working at the hospital in India). So I was reading it and I thought I was going mental, because it seemed so familiar to me, and yet I couldn't have read it because this book is brand new! It was all very odd, but then I thought about where I could possibly have read it before, remembered my whole New Yorker subscription and then found the 'short story' in said issue. All I have to say about this is that 1) I'm kind of irritated at The New Yorker for not, you know, making Eugenides write a short story OR for not sort of at least saying it was adapted from his new novel; but also 2) it is a section extremely well suited to turning into a short story, with just a few mentions of Madeleine omitted. It also made me think that, actually, all the sections could definitely be read independently as well as a whole book, because there are only a few threads that run through them which relate to the stories of others, which is kind of how life is too, you know? (Watch me get all deep!)
You might have noticed that I've written like three paragraphs without telling you anything about the plot or anything much at all really, and that's mainly because, if you just hear about the plot in a simplistic way, it sounds kind of lame. Because, essentially, The Marriage Plot is about a love triangle, and oh my GOD, haven't we had enough of those? But then really, it's not about that at all- it's about three people, and two men who happen to love the same girl, and this girl only loves one of them, but actually she doesn't really know who she is or what she wants yet because she's only 22, for goodness sake! I can wholly relate, apart from the bit where two men are in love with me. I think, far more interesting than the 'love triangle' are the parts where these really young people are figuring out who they are, and learning a lot more than they expected.
I've read some criticism that Eugenides doesn't know how to write women and I don't think that's true at all (I think it was true in The Virgin Suicides, but not anymore), and, in fact, I think he writes people about as well as any author I've read. His characters don't just sit there dully on the page, they live and breathe and kind of exist as much as any characters have. Everything about them seems genuine and honest and just a realistic depiction of how people actually are. I mean, I could be wrong and I might just have found a writer who somehow seems to have gotten specifically inside my head, but I think his appeal is more universal than that, and, you know, everyone should read his books, basically!
So yeah, The Marriage Plot. I've spent my time rambling about it, now I recommend that you spend some time actually reading it because it's so wonderful and complex and the characters so alive that you'd be a fool not to.
Wednesday, 16 November 2011
Double Bagging
"Hi, I'm Laura R and I'm a signing-up-for-challenges addict."
"Hi Laura!"
Yeah, I have issues! But, since I started this blog in January this year, I missed all the fun and exciting signing up for challenges furore that apparently happens in November! And, let's face it, there are many great challenges out there!
This time, though, I'm being smart (ish- smart would be not signing up for lots of challenges...) and double bagging on my challenges. What the heck am I talking about? Well, I'm going to be taking part in Allie at A Literary Odyssey's Shakespeare Reading Month in January, which is great because I can get Othello from the Back to the Classics Challenge read, as well as possibly a couple of other plays and probably Shakespeare by Bill Bryson again (even though I should probably read one of my other Shakespeare books instead... oh well!) And yes, I do often sign up to things Allie is doing, but that's basically because 1) she's awesome, and 2) she keeps doing group reads of books I have and haven't read yet, and I can't think of a good reason not to! (On this note, I'm also group reading Sense and Sensibility with her in December, but I was already reading that for Austen in Advent!)
Anyway, speaking of books I haven't read yet, I'm also signing up for Adam's TBR Challenge, which I realise sounds kind of similar to the Off the Shelf Challenge I also announced my intentions about yesterday BUT I have a plan. And this plan is double bagging! So, for Adam's challenge you have to commit yourself to 12 books that you've had on your shelf for a year or more and if you don't read them you DIE. Ok, maybe not that, but you'll feel a bit ashamed of yourself and unaccomplished come New Years Eve 2012, and that'll really interfere with all the laying about I do on that day (no really, I hate New Years Eve. But anyway). SO, my plan is, take those 12 books, count them for the TBR Challenge but also 12 of my 30 books for the Off the Shelf challenge, and I've only got 18 books left to read for that challenge, which I'll probably achieve with Stephen King books alone!
So, instead of rambling anymore (that's really annoying, isn't it?) here are the twelve books (and 2 reserves) that I'm going to read for the TBR Challenge come 2012:
1. Watership Down by Richard Adams
2. Birdsong by Sebastian Faulks
3. Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell
4. Restoration by Rose Tremain
5. A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson
6. Nights at the Circus by Angela Carter
7. The Remains of the Day by Kazuo Ishiguro
8. Long Walk to Freedom by Nelson Mandela
9. The Falls by Joyce Carol Oates
10. Once There Was A War by John Steinbeck
11. In Love and Trouble by Alice Walker
12. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter S Thompson
And in case a couple of those don't pan out (I'm looking at you, Long Walk To Freedom and Fear and Loathing...):
13. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain
14. The Godfather by Mario Puzo
Doesn't that sound exciting?! You probably didn't notice, but I haven't put any Back To The Classics titles on there because for some reason I think it's a challenge that can't be combined with any other (apart from the Shakespeare reading month but that doesn't count because, you know, not a challenge!). So yeah, that's it. If I say I'm going to sign up for any more challenges, please come over here and shake me and make me stop because I'm just going to be unhappy next year if I do and it'll all end in tears!
"Hi Laura!"
Yeah, I have issues! But, since I started this blog in January this year, I missed all the fun and exciting signing up for challenges furore that apparently happens in November! And, let's face it, there are many great challenges out there!
This time, though, I'm being smart (ish- smart would be not signing up for lots of challenges...) and double bagging on my challenges. What the heck am I talking about? Well, I'm going to be taking part in Allie at A Literary Odyssey's Shakespeare Reading Month in January, which is great because I can get Othello from the Back to the Classics Challenge read, as well as possibly a couple of other plays and probably Shakespeare by Bill Bryson again (even though I should probably read one of my other Shakespeare books instead... oh well!) And yes, I do often sign up to things Allie is doing, but that's basically because 1) she's awesome, and 2) she keeps doing group reads of books I have and haven't read yet, and I can't think of a good reason not to! (On this note, I'm also group reading Sense and Sensibility with her in December, but I was already reading that for Austen in Advent!)
Anyway, speaking of books I haven't read yet, I'm also signing up for Adam's TBR Challenge, which I realise sounds kind of similar to the Off the Shelf Challenge I also announced my intentions about yesterday BUT I have a plan. And this plan is double bagging! So, for Adam's challenge you have to commit yourself to 12 books that you've had on your shelf for a year or more and if you don't read them you DIE. Ok, maybe not that, but you'll feel a bit ashamed of yourself and unaccomplished come New Years Eve 2012, and that'll really interfere with all the laying about I do on that day (no really, I hate New Years Eve. But anyway). SO, my plan is, take those 12 books, count them for the TBR Challenge but also 12 of my 30 books for the Off the Shelf challenge, and I've only got 18 books left to read for that challenge, which I'll probably achieve with Stephen King books alone!
So, instead of rambling anymore (that's really annoying, isn't it?) here are the twelve books (and 2 reserves) that I'm going to read for the TBR Challenge come 2012:
1. Watership Down by Richard Adams
2. Birdsong by Sebastian Faulks
3. Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell
4. Restoration by Rose Tremain
5. A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson
6. Nights at the Circus by Angela Carter
7. The Remains of the Day by Kazuo Ishiguro
8. Long Walk to Freedom by Nelson Mandela
9. The Falls by Joyce Carol Oates
10. Once There Was A War by John Steinbeck
11. In Love and Trouble by Alice Walker
12. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter S Thompson
And in case a couple of those don't pan out (I'm looking at you, Long Walk To Freedom and Fear and Loathing...):
13. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain
14. The Godfather by Mario Puzo
Doesn't that sound exciting?! You probably didn't notice, but I haven't put any Back To The Classics titles on there because for some reason I think it's a challenge that can't be combined with any other (apart from the Shakespeare reading month but that doesn't count because, you know, not a challenge!). So yeah, that's it. If I say I'm going to sign up for any more challenges, please come over here and shake me and make me stop because I'm just going to be unhappy next year if I do and it'll all end in tears!
Revisiting Films: Big; Or, Isn't There A Law Against This Kind of Thing?
I watched Big the other night, and of course everyone's seen it and thinks it's great, and the piano scene in FAO Schwarz is so classic that it's even referenced in The Simpsons, and basically it's just awesome right? And, of course, it is set in the eighties so basically every scene contains some kind of crime against clothes, but it's a lot better than most things from the eighties, and it's just a load of good clean fun, right?
No! Not right! At all! And I don't want to be all alarmist here, but I'm pretty sure that Susan (Elizabeth Perkins) should probably have been arrested for statutory rape. I know what you're going to say. Tom Hanks is a grown man, and even though he has the brain of a boy, he has the body of a man, so even if he and Susan did have sex (which they definitely did- that scene where he has that massive grin on his face and high fives people, and is generally pretty jolly? Total post-sex scene.) how could she have possibly known that he was actually thirteen years old.
I hear ya, but is that really good enough? He's clearly clearly clearly a child in a man suit- he plays with toys all the time, and his apartment is a creepy (for a grown man) childhood shrine, and he just generally ACTS LIKE A FUCKING CHILD the whole time! Even if Susan didn't know he was a child (and, realistically, how could she?) she must have figured there was something wrong with him, even if, for her, successful men are a total aphrodisiac. I guess my point is more, why involve Josh in a sexual relationship at all? Since it's such a morally grey area, surely they could have just erred on the side of caution and not made Josh and Susan have sex, and basically just had him having a good time and frolicking, and then realising he missed his mum and wanted to go home? I mean, in 13 Going On 30, (which is not exactly the same as Big but a similar enough concept) Jenna shies away from sex entirely because it embarrasses her, but also because it's the shrewd move because, grown men having sex with a mentally 13-year-old? Ew.
And I don't think I'm being a puritan about this at all, it's just that it's all a little icky. Especially when, after Josh has made his wish to be small again, and Susan drops him off and watches him revert back to kid form, she sort of looks at him kind of... lustfully. And that's just not right, am I right? I kind of want Susan to be psychologically scarred by it, to be like 'what the hell is wrong with me?! Did I (statutory) rape him?!' instead of the way she does react, which is basically '*sigh* if only you were older, we could be so happy!' I kind of want to snap her out of it, shake her, and be like 'WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?! He's a child, why are you not more freaked out by this rather than making plans for ten years time when your child lover is an actual adult?!' Yeah, it freaks me out, see!
I just had to vent about all that. But really, just put all of that aside as 'Laura's special little issue' and watch Big if you haven't already because it's really fun and silly and also a little bit sad. And then there's some statutory rape, if you like that kind of thing (which I hope you don't). Or if you simply can't watch it now (I understand, I'm not sure I can watch it again myself now!) then just watch this bit, which is simply perfection (albeit inaccurate because when I went to FAO Scwarz, there was a mass of people surrounding the giant piano *humph*- and you don't even want to know how much it costs!)
No! Not right! At all! And I don't want to be all alarmist here, but I'm pretty sure that Susan (Elizabeth Perkins) should probably have been arrested for statutory rape. I know what you're going to say. Tom Hanks is a grown man, and even though he has the brain of a boy, he has the body of a man, so even if he and Susan did have sex (which they definitely did- that scene where he has that massive grin on his face and high fives people, and is generally pretty jolly? Total post-sex scene.) how could she have possibly known that he was actually thirteen years old.
I hear ya, but is that really good enough? He's clearly clearly clearly a child in a man suit- he plays with toys all the time, and his apartment is a creepy (for a grown man) childhood shrine, and he just generally ACTS LIKE A FUCKING CHILD the whole time! Even if Susan didn't know he was a child (and, realistically, how could she?) she must have figured there was something wrong with him, even if, for her, successful men are a total aphrodisiac. I guess my point is more, why involve Josh in a sexual relationship at all? Since it's such a morally grey area, surely they could have just erred on the side of caution and not made Josh and Susan have sex, and basically just had him having a good time and frolicking, and then realising he missed his mum and wanted to go home? I mean, in 13 Going On 30, (which is not exactly the same as Big but a similar enough concept) Jenna shies away from sex entirely because it embarrasses her, but also because it's the shrewd move because, grown men having sex with a mentally 13-year-old? Ew.
And I don't think I'm being a puritan about this at all, it's just that it's all a little icky. Especially when, after Josh has made his wish to be small again, and Susan drops him off and watches him revert back to kid form, she sort of looks at him kind of... lustfully. And that's just not right, am I right? I kind of want Susan to be psychologically scarred by it, to be like 'what the hell is wrong with me?! Did I (statutory) rape him?!' instead of the way she does react, which is basically '*sigh* if only you were older, we could be so happy!' I kind of want to snap her out of it, shake her, and be like 'WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?! He's a child, why are you not more freaked out by this rather than making plans for ten years time when your child lover is an actual adult?!' Yeah, it freaks me out, see!
I just had to vent about all that. But really, just put all of that aside as 'Laura's special little issue' and watch Big if you haven't already because it's really fun and silly and also a little bit sad. And then there's some statutory rape, if you like that kind of thing (which I hope you don't). Or if you simply can't watch it now (I understand, I'm not sure I can watch it again myself now!) then just watch this bit, which is simply perfection (albeit inaccurate because when I went to FAO Scwarz, there was a mass of people surrounding the giant piano *humph*- and you don't even want to know how much it costs!)
Tuesday, 15 November 2011
The Help, Chapters 10-19
Ohhhh boy, the things that are to be said about these chapters. Things have gotten horrible, and digusting, and Skeeter's been told off in the most satisfying way. I still maintain my dislike of Skeeter because she still insists on associating with those people. I say, take your cotton trust fund money and move up North where the normal people are, ok? I also just want to point out that, at this point, Stockett has mentioned Gone With the Wind and To Kill A Mockingbird at least three times each, as if mentioning them will fool readers into thinking that The Help is of the same calibre as them. Which, I'm sorry, but it isn't.
That's not to say that I'm hating The Help though, because that's not true. It's still ridiculously readable (a less nice person might say that's because it's not very complex but... ok, no, I am that mean. It's not) so I'm down with it. Now, let's talk about Minny and Celia, because clearly they're meant to be friends! I love it- Minny's all pretending to hate Celia because she's white (ooh Minny, you racist!) but really she feels sorry for her and wants to protect her which is so lovely I could just hug them both and I'm gonna! Also, we got to meet Celia's husband, and he's nice- he thinks it's great that Minny cooks for him, and he LOVES Celia- now she just has to stop wanting to be friends with those awful women, and everything will be fine there! He also was one of the To Kill a Mockingbird readers, so we can assume that he's possibly for civil rights? Maybe? And he couldn't marry Hilly because she's just heinous? Well, that last bit's true anyway.
And then there was the whole miscarriage down the toilet, and oh my GOD, what was that?! I mean, really, I'm not really squeamish, but that seemed really gross and unecessary! But at least we found out that Celia wasn't a secret drunk, so yay for that. But still, traumatised.
And Skeeter's being all annoying with her predictable boyfriend and her trying to write a book, and does she care that these people might all DIE because she wants to write a book about them? No, I don't think she does. I love love love the community amongst all the maids though- like, when Skeeter's paying them to be interviewed, and they all give their money to send Yule May's (who's now in prison because Hilly's such an EVIL WHORE) boys to college, and really I could just cry at that. Especially because, when Hilly invites that awful Leefolt woman (who's having another baby, and oh my what a bad idea that is) to the country club, she doesn't even buy her lunch when it's pretty clear that she's got a lot of money. God, I hate white people SO FUCKING MUCH.
Which is kind of a bit of a problem really, because it's making me feel like all white people are intrinsically bad, because there isn't one unquestionably good white person in the book so far- except possibly Celia, except that we all know from To Kill a Mockingbird that white trash people are considered basically the same as black people in this society. But where are the white people protesting for Civil Rights? Am I just to assume that they're up in the North, living it up Yankee style? Or is Skeeter going to grow a backbone and start standing up for what she believes is right? Stay tuned for (hopefully) some answers.
That's not to say that I'm hating The Help though, because that's not true. It's still ridiculously readable (a less nice person might say that's because it's not very complex but... ok, no, I am that mean. It's not) so I'm down with it. Now, let's talk about Minny and Celia, because clearly they're meant to be friends! I love it- Minny's all pretending to hate Celia because she's white (ooh Minny, you racist!) but really she feels sorry for her and wants to protect her which is so lovely I could just hug them both and I'm gonna! Also, we got to meet Celia's husband, and he's nice- he thinks it's great that Minny cooks for him, and he LOVES Celia- now she just has to stop wanting to be friends with those awful women, and everything will be fine there! He also was one of the To Kill a Mockingbird readers, so we can assume that he's possibly for civil rights? Maybe? And he couldn't marry Hilly because she's just heinous? Well, that last bit's true anyway.
And then there was the whole miscarriage down the toilet, and oh my GOD, what was that?! I mean, really, I'm not really squeamish, but that seemed really gross and unecessary! But at least we found out that Celia wasn't a secret drunk, so yay for that. But still, traumatised.
And Skeeter's being all annoying with her predictable boyfriend and her trying to write a book, and does she care that these people might all DIE because she wants to write a book about them? No, I don't think she does. I love love love the community amongst all the maids though- like, when Skeeter's paying them to be interviewed, and they all give their money to send Yule May's (who's now in prison because Hilly's such an EVIL WHORE) boys to college, and really I could just cry at that. Especially because, when Hilly invites that awful Leefolt woman (who's having another baby, and oh my what a bad idea that is) to the country club, she doesn't even buy her lunch when it's pretty clear that she's got a lot of money. God, I hate white people SO FUCKING MUCH.
Which is kind of a bit of a problem really, because it's making me feel like all white people are intrinsically bad, because there isn't one unquestionably good white person in the book so far- except possibly Celia, except that we all know from To Kill a Mockingbird that white trash people are considered basically the same as black people in this society. But where are the white people protesting for Civil Rights? Am I just to assume that they're up in the North, living it up Yankee style? Or is Skeeter going to grow a backbone and start standing up for what she believes is right? Stay tuned for (hopefully) some answers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


