I was thinking about how many love triangles I've noticed popping up in YA literature lately, and whether or not I like them. And, it occurred to me that I cannot think of a single instance of a love triangle involving one boy and two girls. In my experience, it is always one girl deciding between two guys. I was trying to figure out why that is, why there were no cases involving two girls and one guy when I realized that as a general rule, we consider guys who are leading on two different females to be a player or a (insert string of long curse words here).
So why is it then okay for it to be a girl deciding between two guys?!
I'm sure every one, at one point or another has come across someone, either in literature or real life who is upset or affected by the gender stereotype/double standard that a boy who has many sexual partners is a stud, but a girl is a slut.
I've heard a lot of people get really up in arms over the above stereotype, both in real life and in literature, but I've never heard anyone talk that way about the reverse (love triangles).
So, what do you think? Why is it that one double standard is so offensive to people, but the other totally acceptable?
Whether you like reading love triangles or not, what are your thoughts on this?
I have a whole bunch of books I know that I should be reviewing right now, but I'm in one of those moods where I'm just not interested in doing anything that will require that much thought, and I'm tired, which right now translates into I'm not going to write anything nice/worthwhile, and most of the books I have in my review que are books that I really, really enjoyed. I don't want those reviews to be crappy, because these books deserve more than that. I thought about not doing anything for today, but I did that yesterday. I was browsing my bookshelves, and I saw my copy of Walden by Henry David Thoreau. I read Walden (or Walden Pond, depending on your copy) about a year ago and wrote up a short review on goodreads. I've been wanting to read and talk about more than just YA lately, and decided that now was as good a time as any.
So, in my title I ask if I'm in the majority or the minority. Meaning — I want to know if anyone who has read this book actually liked it. I've talked to a lot of people who like Thoreau. And, after conversing with them further, I discovered that all of them (except for one) were lying. At least a little. They had read excerpts of Walden or individual quotations and thought them to be insightful and thought-provoking. I agree. When taken one sentence at a time, after, of course, carefully screening for only those which inspire deep thought and meditation, Thoreau is just fine.
I read most of Civil Disobedience in HS as well as excerpts from Walden and I spent a few years thinking Thoreau was pretty hot stuff (literarily speaking of course...) . So, when I found a pretty faux-leather bound copy of Walden and Other Writings at a used bookstore, I grabbed it, and went home so excited to read it, thinking I was going to be so edified. And then, after I started reading it, I realized I was so bored. Thoreau takes 300+ pages to talk about spending 2ish years in the woods, and with the amount he rambled, I'm thinking 100 to 150 pages would have been better. He told stories that related to nothing. In the middle of a chapter about walking around, he's suddenly start spouting off about this dove/dog/man who were all searching for each other and then... and then... and then... nothing. No resolution. He even itemized how much it cost him to build his little home in the woods. (Or rather, how much it should have cost him, because I swear, everything he took with him was donated by someone else...)
Anyway, I could have gotten past the fact that Thoreau's life was a little dull, because really — he's spending 2 years in the woods with very little human contact, and no amenities. Don't get me wrong — I love the woods. I'm not gonna lie — I'd totally go live in the middle of the woods if I had the chance, although I'd make sure I took electricity and a flushing toilet with me... So, I could have forgiven that, and probably enjoyed this book a lot more if Thoreau didn't come off as so darn pompous and self-righteous. I'm kind of glad I never had to meet this man, because his writing makes him sound like one of the most condescending men I've ever come across. And, living in the woods for 2 years without the luxury of a doormat and then moving back to your original home does not make you qualified to tell me that my luxuries are the beginnings of my downfall into evil. He doesn't exactly say this, but it's pretty close and I definitely felt like Thoreau was talking/looking down on the rest of us. I might take Thoreau and his preachings about the benefits of an entirely simple life if he had always lived by Walden. But he didn't. He went home after a few years. But, he's still better than all the rest of us who invite evil into our lives. Bully for you Thoreau.
I understand that this opinion very possibly makes me sound like an uncultured, uneducated philistine. I mean really, Thoreau is one of the Transcendentalists, right up there with Hawthorne, Whitman, and Emerson. I get that... But, I don't care. I didn't enjoy Walden. It's entirely possible that I was simply in the wrong mood to read this type of literature/philosophy when I gave it a shot, but I don't think so. Because I own the book and doubt I'll be getting rid of it (it's pretty and looks great on my bookshelf) I'll probably give this a try again in a few years, when I'm older and hopefully wiser and all that great stuff. And, if I'm still blogging, I'll be sure and let all of you know about my new opinion, if it changes at all.
But I'm confused by all the 5 star ratings on Goodreads. Many more than I would have expected. The 4 and 5 star reviews strongly outweigh the negative reviews. So I wonder... Is there something that I'm missing? Or has the general population bought into the idea that they have to give the book a higher star rating to prove that they did, in fact, get it, as so many of us lesser people seem to not. Perhaps this paragraph doesn't make as much sense as it should... Although I was quite put off by Thoreau himself and his writing, I can see where the basic ideas of economy and simplicity could really resonate with someone. Perhaps, because I was raised to understand that living within my means and avoiding debt and extravagant lifestyles made this book superfluous to me, so I didn't feel it connect with me, but regardless. Whatever the reason I or you come up with, Walden was not for me.
So, I'll ask you again. Am I in the majority, or the minority on this one? How did YOU feel about Walden and Thoreau's writing in general?
Matched by Ally Condie was one of those books that I was super excited about. When I first heard about it, I was beyond excited. I love dystopian literature, and was definitely looking forward to spending some time in Cassia's world. I tend to ignore the hype that other people give to a story, so that rarely affects my overall feelings toward to book, but my own expectations certainly come into play.
The beginning of the story was brilliant. I just knew, by about page 10 that this was a book I was going to need to own. It was only the first chapter, but I already felt that edge of your seat excitement, wondering what was going to happen. The book begins with Cassia on her way to the matching banquet, and her nervous excitement definitely rubbed off on me. I was quite impressed by Condie's writing skills. It's not often I'm that hooked on a story that early.
I felt like I knew that my expectations had been on the mark, and this book was going to amaze me. Sadly, although I did enjoy it, the build up and anticipation ended up being both bigger and better than what was actually delivered.
Condie did a wonderfully horrible job of world building. I think that the idea behind the Society is extra scary, because so few people question it, and so few people recognize that there is something wrong with the way they live, at least of the characters that we met. The Society has completely removed choice. The ability to make my own choices is something I've thought a lot about. I don't believe in destiny or fate, and I don't believe that anyone has a right to make my choices for me, whether my choices are good or bad, they are mine, and mine alone. But, the people in Cassia's world have never known choice. The Society removed it by telling the people that their way was best — it removed disease, genetically weak children, old age, crime, etc. All the bad things are gone, leaving only the 'good' behind. But none of that good is something you were able to decide on.
I listened to Cassia tell us about the choices the Society made for her, and justify their actions, and I kept waiting and waiting for her to wake up, and realize how awful an existence that was. But it wasn't until she began to fall in love with Ky, and realize that she would never be able to be with him that she decided the Society was in the wrong.
Now, I understand that the love story between Cassia and Ky is important to the story, that this is where her awakening begins and yada yada yada. But I was a little disappointed, because I felt like that's all the story was. When I read a dystopian novel, I expect the conflict between character and world to be dominant, not the conflict between love interests. I never felt like Cassia really came to the understanding that the Society was inherently bad or flawed. All she knew was that the Society's control over her ability to make choices was keeping her apart from Ky, whom she loved and that Ky would never be able to make his own choices. If the Society had noticed this part of her, and made an exception for her and Ky, I kind of believe that she would have then been content to live the remainder of her life in peace, leaving the Society as it stands and forgetting her teenaged rebellion in favor of the peaceful settled life with Ky.
There was also a lot of information missing from the story. A lot was left undisclosed, most importantly — how the world became the way it is now. It would take some seriously heavy stuff to completely obliterate choices like that, and I would like to know what happened that convinced the people it was okay to give up all rights and choices, and how long it took to happen. I do know that this is a trilogy, so there are two more books for Condie to make her explanations, but I would still have liked a little more information.
I'm briefly mentioning the love triangle with Xander and Ky because I know that is the main basis for the book, but I don't really think there was that much conflict. This wasn't a case of being in love with my best friend, and then having someone else pop up. Although Cassia and Xander are matched, and even though she is excited about kissing the boy she knows she will marry, Cassia is never really in love with Xander. She loves Ky, and you always know the story is headed in that direction. But, I will say that I thought both boys were incredibly well written characters, and both of them care about Cassia very much. I am looking forward to their roles in the future.
Even though there were a few things I disliked, this really was an enjoyable book. I liked reading it, and would definitely consider myself a fan. I will be reading the next book and I can only hope that Cassia will open her eyes to more flaws than just the injustice being done to Ky.
*Disclaimer: I received this book through Around the World Tours.
Although I do really enjoy reading book lists, and various award winners, you can't always trust the committees who pick the books. Sometimes, you get a 'bad' on in the bunch. Gay-Neck, the Story of a Pigeon by Dhan Gopal Mukerji is one such book.
While not a horrid book, Gay-Neck is also not a book I would recommend or reread. I picked it up because it is on the Newbery list, and it is one of only two books thus far that I truly disliked. (The other being Hitty: Her First Hundred Years by Rachel Field.) It's been a little while since I read this one, so my memory of specific details, but the way the book made me feel is still pretty fresh. I was reorganizing my books for storage (sad, I know) and I saw this one, and decided to write my review now and get it over with while I was thinking about it...
The book is about a young boy in India who trains pigeons around the time of World War I. Gay-Neck happens to be one of his prized pigeons. Initially, our narrator is the young boy. Through him, we learn about the training procedures for carrier pigeons and what his life is like. Later in the story however, we get to hear from Gay-Neck himself as he goes off to war and a few other places as well. I have never been a big fan of animals being the ones to tell a story. There are a few exceptions, but for the most part, I rather dislike that.
There wasn't much that I liked about this book. The writing never grabbed me, the story never interested me, and the characters never moved me. I don't know what I'm supposed to feel when a pigeon starts making eyes at this pretty lady pigeon, but I definitely missed that one.
I respect this as an award winner, because there are very few award winners that are so obviously set in, or about other cultures beyond America. Not to say that the book has no merit on its own, but I believe the glimpse into another culture played a large role in earning this book the golden sticker. I can't think of another Newbery book set in India or written by an Indian author right off hand, and it's always nice to be able to add a bit of culture.
Although I wasn't a fan of this book, I can understand why some view it as a distinguished contribution to children's literature, and I've even been told that there are people out there who truly enjoyed this book. I haven't met any yet, but I'll let you know if I do! I think that this is a book with a very limited audience, and sadly, one of the Newbery winners that has not stood the test of time well.
So, I feel like everyone has at least one book they read as a kid that was way too old for them, but was totally awesome anyway.
Mine was Vertical Run
by Joseph Garber. My aunt left it behind after she stayed at our house for a visit when I was somewhere between 12 and 14. Knowing I was always needing something to read, my mom let me keep it without really knowing what it was about. I probably wouldn't recommend this book to anyone younger than 16 or 17. Not because the book is hugely inappropriate. It's not. It's just very violent and has a lot of very foul language (some of those people are very creative, especially for a 12 year old). This is the book that introduced me to conspiracy literature.
The whole book is about a highly trained group of huge muscle bound mercenaries trying to kill a middle-aged Vietnam vet inside his 50 story office building. As his specialized combat training begins to return, he fights back and serious amounts of mayhem ensue. Dave is our main character and it was fascinating to follow his interactions with Ransome, the main 'bad guy' (or is he?...) . This book takes place within a roughly 24-hour time frame, and with only a few exceptions, happens entirely within one 50 story office building. Dave has to stay a step ahead of them in order to survive and he has very limited resources. He has no idea why they are after him. All he knows is that they seem to possess incredible amounts of power and authority and that they have managed to bring everyone he knows and cares about on their side. With no one to turn to and no where to run, Dave must find the tools to stay alive while also trying to unravel the carefully hidden secret that will explain why everyone around him seems to suddenly want him dead. Ha, and you thought your day sucked.
Interspersed throughout the book are flashbacks to Dave's younger years, both growing up and the time he served in the military. Each segment is a lead in to a skill or ability Dave has learned that will allow him to escape and survive yet again. They were a lot of fun, and never felt clunky or forced. I also loved Dave's snarky inner voice. It isn't really Dave and it isn't really a separate person either. It's more a blend of the two. This inner voice is about as close as you can come to hearing voices without actually being considered crazy... (Perhaps.)
I've reread this book many times and will undoubtedly read it again in the future. It comes really close to a basically amazing review, and I loved it, but I don't love the ending. We do end up discovering why everyone wants to kill poor Dave. But, I feel like the author took the easy way out. The way we (and Dave) obtain the information is plausible, but not quite in character and felt like Garber just really needed a quick way to end it. (a la Ransome ex Machina)
Now that you know my 'under-aged' favorite, please share yours! Leave the book that you knew you shouldn't be reading but loved anyway in the comments section. Share what you liked about it then, and what you think of it now, if you have reread it.
When Shlemiel went to Warsaw and Zlateh the Goat are both collections of short stories awarded a Newbery Honor in 1969 and 1967 respectively. They were written by Isaac Bashevis Singer, a Jewish author well known for his short stories, who received the 1978 Nobel Prize in Literature.
These two collections included several stories that I really enjoyed and many that I didn't much like. Several stories in each book took place in the city of Chelm and mentioned the 7 City Elders (described by the author as fools). One of the residents of that city is Shlemiel, who appears in several stories and is also, undeniably, a fool. Although I like to think I have a sense of humor, and I enjoy a good taste of the ridiculous every now and again, sometimes, it's just a little too much. The two collections contained just a few too many stories dealing with the utter foolishness of these people for me to truly enjoy the reading. To give a quick example, a short story from Zlateh the Goat entitled The Snow in Chelm begins like this:
Chelm was a village of fools, fools young and old. One night someone spied the moon reflected in a barrel of water. The people of Chelm imagined it had fallen in. They sealed the barrel so that the moon would not escape. When the barrel was opened in the morning and the moon wasn't there, the villagers decided it had been stolen. They sent for the police, and when the thief couldn't be found, the fools of Chelm cried and moaned.
For some, I'm sure these stories would be very enjoyable and amusing tales. However, reading story after story involving more and more absurdities became just a little too much for me. Between the two books, almost half the stories dealt in some way with the preposterous happenings of the residents of Chelm.
However, I generally found the stories that did not mention Shlemiel or the Elders (and people) of Chelm to be very entertaining, and often delightful. I especially enjoyed the stories, Rabbi Leib & the Witch Cunegunde, and Shrewd Todie & Lyzer the Miser and the message of Utzel & His Daughter Poverty from Warsaw. My favorites from Zlateh were the stories Fool's Paradise, and Zlateh the Goat. These stories are all clever and well written, often with a warm moral, subtly teaching the reader ways to improve and become better without beating you over the head with the moral.
For the most part, I enjoyed reading these stories. It's always nice to get a new look at a culture I know very little about. In the foreward to Warsaw, Singer mentions that while each are retold using his own language and ideas, several of the stories within came from legends and stories told by his mother and grandmother. I love the different folk tales from various cultures, so that was fun. I did enjoy reading these short stories, and am glad I picked them up.
I am going to preface this post by saying that I do not hate Twilight. I actually enjoyed reading the books. (More on that later.) HOWEVER, no matter how much I do or don't enjoy reading Twilight there are some things that should just not be messed with.
This weekend, while visiting other bloggers through the hop, I came across this lovely site by Lily called After the Fall. I was enjoying myself, just browsing through when I noticed a post discussing how Jane Austen received a Twilight makeover. Excuse me?! A what?!
Let me explain. Apparently, the people at HarperTeen thought it would be a good idea to reissue several much beloved classics with new covers to generate more interest from Twilight lovers. Allow me to illustrate:
In Twilight we see loose elements of Pride and Prejudice threaded throughout Bella and Edward's relationship. To capitalize on this, we now have the recovered version seen here. It has the black background with the red and white floral motif, similar font and a tag line. (I agree with Lily — they gave Jane Austen a tag line?! Ugh!)
In New Moon, we have elements of Romeo and Juliet. They can't seem to find a happy ending, I'd rather die than live without you etc. So, they gave Shakespeare a new cover. Shakespeare!! Seriously, what is this world coming to?!
In Eclipse, the literary connection comes from Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights. (Although, as much as I enjoyed that book, I definitely don't think I would want my relationship compared to Healthcliff and Catherine — can we say dysfunctional and unhealthy?!)
As if it's not bad enough that they took these three classic pieces of literature and capitolized on their connection to Twilight, apparently it is now the thing to use to draw the teenage girl demographic to classics. Don't believe me, just look at what they've done to Jane Eyre.
I meant it when I said that I bear Twilight no ill will. I enjoyed the books for what they are and I like the fact that the books do not pretend to be something that they are not. I can't believe that there are people who think this is a good idea! To me, it implies that without Twilight, these books would not actually be worth reading. I'm sorry, but that's bull!
I can't stop you from purchasing these editions. I can't stop anyone from purchasing these editions. But I warn you — no matter how much I like you, if I see you with one of these covers or I hear that you have purchased them, I will judge you.
Here it is everyone! A special thank you to author M. Clifford for taking the time to write up a post just for us. Leave a comment and let us know your thoughts!
Most of the time when people read my novel, THE BOOK (www.dontreadthebook.com) , they come away proud of the passion they always had inside for the written word and for storytelling. Some people close the novel with a fresh desire to read more paperbacks or to buy their books from used bookstores and sign the inside cover so that someone will always know that they owned that book and loved those pages. A lot of people ask me what my intentions were in writing THE BOOK and there are many. To follow through on my promise to give you a unique guest blog post, I'll touch on the one motivation I haven't discussed very much — the redemption of the storyteller. In my novel, I definitely glorify story and the ability to read it freely from an honest source. Reading is a private and very personal act. Authors are who they are because they love telling stories. Creating an arc and then another arc and then another until they reached the end of a much larger one that began somewhere in the beginning. I'm an intentionally self-published independent author. I've never sought representation from a major publishing house or even attempted to get an agent beyond a few query letters six years back. I'm sort of a rare breed in that I am passionately supportive of the indie author and I encourage them to get their work read, edited and uploaded so that story-lovers can keep finding things to read. Not everyone is a storyteller, even when they've written a book, and that's sort of the negative element to the benefit of being able to self-publish. Stay with me because I'll loop this back to the beginning and it'll all makes sense in a minute. I have often read books that are waiting for me to open them the moment I enter a bookstore. Stacks upon stacks of shiny covers waiting. I know hundreds of thousands have been printed and I almost feel a responsibility to take one for that fact alone. And then, when I get home and start reading, I have felt by chapter four that I've already listened to four different voices. Three other people have written a few sentences here and a paragraph there. I'm sure of it. Although publishing houses do a good service for the written word by printing and distributing and marketing high-quality stories, they are a still a business. A for-profit business. They will alter a story if need be, or convince an author to do so, simply to sell more copies. I wouldn't be surprised if there are authors today that, after submitting their work, get a reply like, "Solid book, but please make all your characters vampires. Send it back and we've got a deal!" That is obviously an outrageous, dramatic example. My point is that altering an original work is akin to someone being interrupted during the telling of a campfire story. I included a similar scene in my book, sans interruption. Campfire storytelling is a wonderful pastime where novels begin and the mind of the creative person is sparked toward a future in writing. The desire to tantalize and entice people around them, to get them to the edge of their log as they wait to find out where the man with the hook on his arm is hiding. Now picture this budding author telling his story, only to be interrupted by someone else at camp who thinks everyone needs to know that "one of the characters was also a vampire. Okay... go ahead now. Finish the story." Even though plenty of readers could find that to be more beneficial to the story, I think it is important for readers to know that when they buy a book from a bookstore, or from someone that isn't an independent author, they may not be getting a single story. They are getting one that has been edited with scissors and tape and red pen from multiple handwriting styles suggesting alternate story lines, characters, etc. When you read THE BOOK, it is 100% mine. Every idea is mine and every line is mine (other than what I reference from classic and contemporary literature) because no one has the ability to control my writing. Although this was not my main motivation, not even in the top 10, I do think it is important as we move into this new age of digital reading to discuss the future of publication. I would be lying if part of me wasn't afraid for the authors who have written stories that other people control. Who's to say that on the 50th anniversary of THE SHINING by Stephen King, the sales department at the publishing house will not only create a new cover, but alter the story to explain that the reason the main character went crazy and attacked his family was because of a full moon and that he was actually a werewolf or something. Sure it sounds interesting when you hear the idea, but Stephen King may not be alive when that happens, which means that he would be unable to defend the characters he created. Is that really fair to do that to him or his characters? In a sense, the publishing house owns those characters... so...
We see a lot of this today with Quirk Classics and their new release of Android Karenina. I'm not opposed to taking old stories and putting a new twist on them, I think it's really smart. I hope to dabble in that at some point in my future. It's fun and it's creative, but it only illustrates my point further. How destroyed would Jane Austen be to known that her characters were mangled and reformed into something comedic and disgusting? To know that the lines that she cried over, that mixed with the ink of her pen, were now spliced with a graphic image of a zombie tearing into the fleshy neck of some matriarch from a rich family while she's reading quietly in her stately home. The difficult thing is that there is not an easy answer for this question. That's why a lot of people have enjoyed discussing THE BOOK after buying it, because I ask a lot of unanswerable questions. Do we treat these books as just a collection of words? One after the other, after the other and the other, until there are enough pages to be clasped together and wrapped with a hard linen binding? Or are they unique works of art that must remain perfectly intact, structurally sound, exactly as the artist intended? Does it make it okay to chop it up and change it simply because enough time has passed? Maybe. It's a good discussion to have. What is great is that my book is gaining attention during the advent of popularity with these mash-up novels. I think that in ten or twenty years we'll really see how people go about augmenting this idea further. Here's the real truth in the matter: the moment you edit or add to an original manuscript, a line is crossed. Again, I'm not saying crossing that line is bad. But it is crossed and respect must still be given to the original. How far then do we walk past the line before it is too hard to get back? And, by then, when we reach the point of no return, will people even care? As an author, I know I would be devastated to hear that a hundred years from now someone could take my characters and change them any way they pleased, simply to make a profit. Those characters are pieces of me and I love them, as any author would. I poured my soul into them. But, in the same breath, although I would not agree with the actions of someone disfiguring my work, I'll fight to the death their freedom to do so. And maybe therein lies the real question — How much of this is an expression of freedom, and how much is a defacement of public property? The reader must decide, because it's not stopping anytime soon. M. Clifford
In my about me page, I mentioned that I love working my way through book lists. I have several that I am actively working through and many others on the side that would be nice to get to, one day. I thought I would spend a moment and introduce those lists that are an active part of my reading patterns.
THE NEWBERY AWARD
In 1922, the American Library Association (ALA) began awarding The John Newbery Medal to what they determined to be the most distinguished contribution to children's literature for that year. Because of the multitude of amazing books written each year, the committee is also allowed to acknowledge those books which did not make the final cut but are still worthy of recognition. These are given The Newbery Honor Medal. While not a exact system, and each year there are and will be people who disagree with the novel chosen as the recipient, I appreciate the effort made to recognize these books and make them more accessible to children. If you are a recipient of the Newbery Award, your book will likely never go out of print (and it's kept some doozys around) and most libraries and bookstores will carry a copy. As of today — 6/28 — I have read 67 out of the 89 winners. I'm almost there! I intend to read and own every Newbery Winner. I'm not as committed to reading every honor (there are almost 300) but I'd like to read many, if not all of them at some point. THE PRINTZ AWARD
In 2000, the ALA added the Michael L. Printz Award to recognize those books which exemplify literary excellence in young adult literature. Like the John Newbery Award, each year a committee chooses which book most fits this criteria as well as recognizing the 'runners-up', which are awarded a Printz Honor. Because it's a newer award, I am aiming to read all of the winners and honors. I'd like to own many of them, but am not as committed to owning every one the way I am with the Newberys. So far, out of 11 winners I've read 3 and I've read 8 out of 41 honors. I've got a long way to go on this award, but I'm enjoying the process.
THE BBC'S THE BIG READ In 2003, The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) conducted a survey to determine the nation's favorite books. The list is in 3 parts — The top 100 favorites, top 200 favorites and the top 21. The top 21 books were ranked by popularity, with the understanding that each author could only be represented once among the top 21 favorites. My focus is on the top 100 books, although it may shift to include the top 200 once I complete the first bunch. So far I've read 29 1/2 (got stuck getting all the way through The Lord of the Rings trilogy) but I've got several more on my immediate to-read list.
We all know that there are myriads of great (and not so great) books that have been turned into movies, plays, animated cartoons, TV shows and etc. etc. etc. I always roll my eyes at people who respond to the question — How did you like that book? With some variation of, "Oh ya, I loved it! The movie was so great!" Gag. Really?! You just said that?! You just smeared the name of literature by telling me a book was great because you liked the movie?! (Ahem...) Well, the other day I shamefacedly realized that I was guilty of this myself. (Insert horrified gasp here) One of my fondest memories of Christmas, most beloved childhood memories and in my top 3 favorite Christmas stories was missing something...
A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens is one of the most recognized, well known, and cherished Christmas stories in existence. There are numerous versions and adaptations for both children and adults, in animation, live action or produced live on stage. You can find it serious or slightly comical or even as a musical. Some follow the original script closely while others use only a loose interpretation of the story. Whatever versions you've seen, most people are very familiar with the plight of the Cratchit family and Tiny Tim, the cold, miserly heart of Ebenezer Scrooge, and the eerie spirits who visit him during the night of Christmas Eve.
However familiar we are with the story, how many of us have actually read the book? I imagine not very many. It's included on BBC's The Big Read and I wonder how many people include it because of the story rather than the book itself. So, to avoid this horrible reader faux pas, I decided to pick up this favored story and read it for myself. It's a short book, more of a novella than a novel, and I already knew that I loved the story.
I did really enjoy reading this book and I'm glad I can now say that I've actually read it. However, I must admit that I am more in love with the idea of this book than its reality. It's a wonderful story, with a wonderful message and wonderful characters, but I didn't have the same emotional connection to the written story that I do to the various productions I've seen. I know that this is more due to past experiences and the relationship it has to my childhood than anything negative about the book. I loved the book and will definitely reread it in the future, but it's just not the same as watching Scrooge, the Musical or The Muppets.
The book places more emphasis on the characters and the realizations they make than just the story of Scrooge. Most movie or live productions emphasize Scrooge's discovery of the Christmas Spirit, and becoming a more generous person. I love that, and it is a very important part of the story. However, I love that reading the book offers more insight into why Scrooge became the way he did and the relationships he had with those around him.
It is a great story to invite the Christmas spirit and remember the true meaning of Christmas, but it is also a cautionary tale. Be careful the emphasis you place on money and things. It is usually more important to focus on the people in your lives than the things in your life and this story, no matter how you experience it is a great reminder of that.
Photos courtesy of Gary Benson, a scenic designer. For more images and more information, you can find him on Webshots here and he also blogs at Bascombe Mania. If you are interested in his photography, please contact him through one of the links provided.
First, let me thank both Lori at The Next Best Book Blog and author M. Clifford. Lori hosted a contest to win a copy of M. Clifford's new book, The Book. I won.
Prior to reading The Book, every dystopian society I've come across in literature has been the result of a major apocalypse, huge earth changing war or a major catastrophe. It is then relatively easy for this "utopian" government to step in and take over because anarchy reigns and the people are in desperate need of some order. Even a highly controlling government sounds great when faced with the absolute lack of one. This gives most dystopian literature a feeling of separation from reality. We can see the similarities to our culture and society and hopefully avoid that future, but we breathe easier because we know it can't reach that level of atrocity without that apocalyptic moment. And, if we are faced with the apocalypse, we probably have other things on our minds. The major disaster that destroys most of the world keeps us at a disconnect that allows me to sleep comfortably at night knowing my government is solid, even though it isn't perfect. M. Clifford refuses to allow me that small comfort. The government who orchestrated the introduction and infiltration of this insidious electronic reading device is my own United States Government, still bound by the amazingly brilliant United States Constitution. This adds a new element of fear to his book. With all other works of dystopian literature, I am able to take comfort in the knowledge that my government would never be reduced to those extremes, and that I can take comfort in the protections, securities and liberties written into and guaranteed by the Constitution. Clifford takes that away from me, and instead shows me a world where my government is responsible for the systematic destruction of the printed word and ultimately our freedom of speech, the press and expression. I shudder. I cringe. But, it forces me to think.
Aside from uniquely blaming our current government on the horrific situation our hero finds himself in, the best part about this book was the love of literature that simply flowed from the pages. This book is one that truly speaks to lovers of the written (and printed) word. The way Clifford drafts his character's discussion, description and handling of books is reverent, almost sacred. The imagery he uses to describe these character's first experiences with an actual printed book gave me goosebumps. There were numerous allusions, both blatant and indirect to a wide variety of literature. He quoted multiple sources ranging from popular fiction to fairy tales to classics. He used them as inspiration for parts of his story, but managed to do it in a way that doesn't feel as if he is 'borrowing' their ideas in substitute for his own. His written voice is unique enough, even when directly quoting sources, that the words almost felt like entirely new ideas. If you take away nothing else from this book, remember that books are important and have the ability to transform your world and your life. Love them, treasure them, but most importantly, read them.
In this novel, M. Clifford has gifted the reader with both the horrors of a nightmare and the majestic beauty of a dream. His book begins with the words "Don't read the book". But it's more than that. If you read between the lines and apply it to right now, we can instead say, Don't let others think for you. Don't follow blindly. Question everything.
With us today, we have Mette Ivie Harrison, author of The Princess and the Hound, The Princess and the Bear, The Princess and the Snowbird, Mira, Mirror and the upcoming Tris and Izzie. Her bio tells us that her name, Mette is Danish and when spoken, rhymes with 'Betty'. She currently lives in Utah with her husband and five children. And, she tells us 'I write during nap time, or at 4 in the morning, or while the broccoli for dinner is burning. Whenever Ig et a chance. I love to write the kind of books that I love to read. And I love to discover what it going to happen next, just like a reader would.' As if being a writer isn't enough, she also participates in triathlons.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
I wrote the first draft of The Princess and the Hound in 1997, and in that version, it was a retelling of the story of The Princess and the Pea. Doesn’t sound likely, does it? What happened as I was writing the first scene, in which the bedraggled princess knocks on the door of the castle to escape from a rainstorm, was that she came in with this hound. This big, black hound whom she would not let anyone take away from her. It was obvious they were very close, that their relationship was not like any other hound and girl. And Prince George, who told the story from the first, could not stop thinking about this princess and this hound. He had to find out the mystery behind their relationship.
So, it was a mystery and a romance from the beginning, and it was based on a fairy tale. But as I rewrote it many, many times over the next eight years before it was accepted for publication, it took on its current hints of Beauty and the Beast. In fact, I thought of it as a new fairy tale, a story that would make the reader sure that this was a fairy tale she had missed reading from the original Grimm’s collections, but in fact was my own invention. It wasn’t until my editor pointed out the hidden Beauty and the Beast that I realized she was right. There are many fairy tales based on Beauty and the Beast, however, and it is only if you look for it that you will see that as a backstory.
Some readers have complained that The Princess and the Hound isn’t a retelling at all. Well, it’s not like any other retelling you’ve probably ever read. I think my brain is just twisty this way, and as soon as I hear a story, I start thinking of the way I would tell it, and by the time I actually tell it well enough that it could be published, it doesn’t look very much like the original. I got some of the same complaints from readers of Mira, Mirror. If you want a retelling of Snow White, you might not be happy with Mira, Mirror, because Snow White appears in one sentence and then disappears. It’s the story of the mirror and the evil queen before Snow White and after. It’s my own story, one only I could tell.
I remember an experience at a writing conference I went to in 2010. Candace Fleming was there and she was teaching a section on writing historical non-fiction. She had just finished writing The Lincolns, a wonderful biography of Abraham and Mary Todd Lincoln, and she told us about a bit of historical fact. Mary Todd had been stopped by a night watchman while running by the streets of Atlanta in the wee hours of the morning. The night watchman thought she would only be running toward an elopement, but in fact, she was going to an early morning poetry class, held at that hour so that the oppressive heat of the summer did not bother the students. We were supposed to work on telling only the facts of the story, adding in no details we could not verify. This was something I could not do. Really. I just wanted to go off in all directions on my own. In fact, I started working on a novel called The Asylum after this workshop, using the idea of a girl sent to an insane asylum (as Mary Todd Lincoln was sent by her own son after Abraham’s assassination) for no reason other than that she would not do as she was told.
Tris and Izzie, which will be out in the fall with Egmont, is a project I have been thinking about for a long time, as well. I studied German Literature in college and have a PhD in it. I read Tristan and Isolde in the original middle high German in grad school, and also listened to Wagner’s opera of it. It’s one of the greatest love stories of all time, but it’s also very frustrating to me. It doesn’t have very modern sensibilities about women, and I object to the adultery scheme. Plus the ending is wretched, not romantic at all. And I hate love triangles. So why in the world would I choose to do a retelling of that story? Well, the challenge of it always gets me excited. I feel like I tend to retell fairy tales I hate more often than ones that I like, because I want to fix them. Tris and Izzie is my “fixed” version of the original. I get to play with a love triangle, but in a way that I don’t find objectionable.
I often find that when I read a standard romance with a love triangle, I want to smack all three characters around. What are those two hot guys doing, waiting around to be chosen? They need to get a life, both of them, and dump her. Plus, what is her problem? Doesn’t she know she can’t hold guys on a string like that? If she seriously can’t choose, then she’s too stupid and young to have a romance right now anyway and she should go to an all girls’ school until she grows up. So, in my version of the love triangle, you can imagine things are a little different. I don’t want to give it all away, but I hope readers like my modern take.
Tris and Izzie is also the first time I’ve had a chance to try out a humorous slant on a retelling. It’s not slapstick funny, but Izzie tells the story and she has an ironic twang to her depiction of events that I think works well. There’s lots of action and big save the world stuff going on, but she can also make fun of herself and what’s going on at the same time. It may not feel like it’s as serious a love story or a meditation on life as The Princess and the Hound, but there’s some serious stuff hidden in there, too. I mention how I feel about love triangles, about girls who can’t choose who they love, and about girls who are fighting over the same guy. Also, what secrets do to relationships. And what has happened to our scientific world in which we have no sense of magic anymore. Those are some of the big themes that I think are touched on, while the readers are having a good time reading.
I've got a new website up: www.trisandizzie. com which I’m trying to promote. There is a “Dear Izzie” vlog there, where “Izzie” answers questions for the romantically and magically challenged. So I will give a free book away to the best question posted here in comments, with the understanding that all questions can be used on my blog. Hope you have fun!
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ What a wonderful post Mette! It was awesome hearing more of the story behind the book. And Tris and Izzie looks amazing! Can't wait to read it!! Isn't that cover gorgeous?!
Alright everyone! You heard her! Go to www.trisandizzie. com and come up with some questions for Izzie for your chance to win a copy of The Princess and the Hound!
Be sure to leave your questions in the comments section of this post!! Contest ends May 5th. May 8th!
Beauty by Robin McKinley was a very important book for me. As is quite obvious by now, I love fairy tales. When I hear that a book is a retold fairy tale, I automatically want to read that book. However, I wasn't always like this. I've always loved fairy tales themselves, but I didn't know that fairy tale retellings existed and I was adamantly opposed to reading fantasy. As I mentioned in a previous Memory Monday, I thought fantasy was beneath me.
But then, my friend introduced me to Robin McKinley and I read Beauty. I couldn't believe it! Here was a fairy tale, fleshed out and grown up! There was more to it than the traditional tale, and we get to see more of Beauty, the beast and her home life and family. I recognized more elements of the original tale than you see in the Disney version, such as Beauty's sisters, her father as a merchant etc. There is no dancing singing silverware in this version but the house is enchanted, just as the beast is, and the servants do not hold their true shapes.
But oh! This story is magical! It changed me. It introduced me to a whole new world of fairy tales, stories and retellings. Without this book, I might never have discovered retold fairy tales, might never have been introduced to this amazing world of literature, and oh what a travesty that would be.
I read and reread this book many times. It adds depth and detail to a story without straying too far from the original and creates a world I fell into effortlessly. Beauty is a solid character, one who sacrifices herself for the good of her family, one who looks past appearances. But she is also very real. She isn't the glowing gorgeous beauty of Disney fame, and it takes her a while to feel comfortable in the beast's home. She slowly learns to open up and trust him, but her responses and feelings toward the beast are very realistic, very believable.
And, I feel that I would be remiss in this review, as a book lover, if I didn't briefly mention the library. If it were in my nature, I would have swooned reading that scene. I tell you, it puts the Disney library to shame, and who would have thought that possible?!
Perhaps my thoughts and feelings for this book would be different, had I read it later in life. But, as it stands, this will always be a very favorite of mine, because it introduced me to a whole new genre and the beauty and magic of it changed my perspective on reading and life. It's one I would recommend to everyone.
Misty posted about this book yesterday! Check out her thoughts on Beauty.
Today's interview is with Jessica Day George, author of the Dragon Slippers Trilogy, Princess at the Midnight Ball, Princess of Glass, and Sun and Moon, Ice and Snow. Jessica earned her BA in Humanities/Comparative Literature from Brigham Young University, where she enjoyed classes in Pottery and Old Norse, and dutifully forces herself to take Algebra and Biology. Originally from Idaho, she now resides in Salt Lake City, Utah with her husband, their young son and a five pound Maltese named Pippin.
The 'Serious' Questions:
I get the feeling that a lot of 'you’ goes into your fairy tales (Norway, the knitting, etc). How do these elements get infused into the stories? Is it a conscious choice (I’m goingto make Galen a knitter), or does it just happen (Oh, hey, I just made Galen a knitter!)?
Yes, and yes. And yes. SUN AND MOON came about because of my love of Norway, and the fairy tale EAST O' THE SUN, WEST O' THE MOON. I wanted to throw everything I love about them into that book: polar bears! wolves! snow! And it just all felt "right", so I didn't actually have to stop and think, Hmmm, good place for them to make lefse? Here? Or here? I don't honestly remember when I decided that Galen would be a knitter... sorry. But I do know that it must have seemed like a natural fit, because when my editor went, HE knits? I had to think, Um, is that weird or something?
Basically, my head is filled with "stuff": random facts, strange words, bric-a-brac. And when I'm writing, it's just all there, ready to filter down into the story where it needs to go. Once in a while I'll think, Y'know, I need something weird here, and then I'll root around (living gargoyle housekeeper) and put it into a story. So it's really a combination.
Any plans to do a more modern retelling, or does the magic lie in “long ago and far away” for you?
While I have enjoyed and admired many modern day retellings, for me when I write, "Long ago and far away" seems like a better fit for the story I want to tell.
What’s the process like for you? Do you start with the characters, the “spin” or do you work from a standard tale and expand out as you explore it?
It depends on the story. With SUN AND MOON, I wanted to tell that story, to expand. Who was this young girl? Why were her parents so eager to let her go away with the bear? Who was the bear? And so on. With MIDNIGHT BALL, I was intrigued by the idea of the story, but I also had an idea about Galen: a young man who only knows how to be a soldier, but the war is over. And Rose: what would it be like to be under a curse you didn't create, what would it be like to be the oldest of twelve girls with no mother? Would you want the responsibility, or would you fight it? So it all depends on what the story I wanted to tell, on whether I wanted to tell the story straight as with SUN AND MOON, or whether I wanted to play with the characters and the setting, and the story was just a background? (MIDNIGHT BALL, PRINCESS OF GLASS).
What’s your favorite scene you’ve ever written?
When the Lass encounters the first of the four winds in SUN AND MOON. Actually, all of the part with the four winds is possibly my finest writing, if I do say so myself.
I've made no secret of the fact that I think Sun and Moon, Ice and Snow is one of the best fairy tale retellings I’ve ever read, and you’ve been open about the passion (obsession?) that went into it. Can you tell us a little bit about the research and the love that went into creating the lass and her world?
Well, let's see: I took four years of Norwegian. Two semesters of reading and analyzing fairy tales in the original Norwegian or German. Went to Norway on my honeymoon. Jotted down every idea I had that might work in the book for over ten years. Studied Old Norse for a semester. Looked at endless pictures of polar bears, the Arctic Circle, wolves, and read a rather dry book about reindeer herding.
Follow up: What are some bits of your studies in Norway that didn’t make it into the book, that you still cherish?
I'm not sure how much I cherish it, per se, but I can describe the reindeer cheese making process to you. Would you like to hear about it? (Sigh. No one ever does.)
Further follow up: any plans to set any future books in Norway?
Of course.
Can you tell us about anything you’re working on now?
I am finishing the edits of TUESDAYS AT THE CASTLE, which will release on October 11, 2011, and I am writing the rough draft for a third Princess book, based on a fairy tale about a girl who owns a red cape, if you catch my drift...
Why fairy tales? What is it that calls to you, personally,as a writer, and why do you think readers connect to them the way they do?
Fairy tales tantalize us because they ARE our daydreams: Cinderella, unappreciated, overworked, gets to wear a beautiful dress, go to a party, and is loved by a prince. The miller's youngest son inherits nothing but a cat, becomes fabulously wealthy, marries a princess. Beautiful stuff! And who hasn't felt like Cinderella? My mom used to make me dust the leaves of her ginormous houseplants! I wanted a fairy godmother to spirit me away SO BADLY! And as a writer, it's fun because you have the outline for your book right there, but there are endless ways to play with it. Half the time, the main character doesn't even have a name! You can describe them how you want, name them, put your personal stamp on them, and then see how that changes the story! It's a wonderful game for a writer! Sorry about all the exclamation points!
Quickfire, Silly and Random stuff:
Rapunzel is named after lettuce; what odd thing would you be named after if you were in fairy tale?
My dad has always called me Woozelina, because I was terrified of the Heffalumps and Woozles dream sequence in the Winnie the Pooh cartoon.
Using that name, give us a line from your life as a fairy tale:
Woozelina had been dusting houseplants all day, and she was very tired and smelled like potting soil.
Best fairy tale villain and why?
Maleficent from Disney's Sleeping Beauty: great fashion sense and she can turn into a freakin' dragon!
Favorite tale from childhood? East o' the Sun, West o' the Moon Favorite tale as an adult? East o' the Sun, West o' the Moon.
Least favorites? Hansel and Gretel. Also, I never really got into some of those more obscure ones, like Bluebeard.
If you could be any fairy tale character, or live through any fairy tale "happening," who/what would it be?
I wouldn't want to be a lot of them! Some of these people have some truly horrific things they go through first! But I could do East o' the Sun, or Beauty and the Beast.
Would you rather: - — eat magic beans or golden eggs? Golden eggs! - — style 50ft long hair or polish 100 pairs of glass slippers? I SO want the hair! - — have a fairy godmother or a Prince Charming? Prince Charming!
Thank you for being with us Jessica!
Giveaway Details!! Jessica has generously offered up a prize pack for one luck winner! She has offered a prize pack containing an ARC of Sun and Moon, Ice and Snow and a PB of Princess at the Midnight Ball. To win, fill out THIS FORM here AND you MUST leave a comment about the interview. Jessica gave an awesome interview, so let's leave her some love peeps! Please also be aware that this is the SAME form as found on The Book Rat and only enter ONCE. Comment on whichever blog you entered through. Contest is open to US Only Ends May 5thMay 8th! +1 possible entry for spreading the word
Everyone, please welcome Amber of The Literary Wife to the blog today for Memory Monday! I've loved chatting with Amber on Twitter and was thrilled when she agreed to be my guest! So, here she is!!
My name is Amber Keck and I have been blogging for almost a year at The Literary Wife. I started my blog to fulfill a challenge I gave myself to read through the Top 100 Children's Books, as compiled by Betsy Bird at A Fuse #8 Production. I have had a blast reading through old classics and some books that I hope will become classics in the future. It is my pleasure to be sharing with you, Ashley's readers.
Growing up, we lived about fifty feet from my town's public library, so you can imagine where I spent a lot of my time. I actually ended up working there in high school, one of the best jobs I have ever had. It was just a small library, but there was a great collection of children's literature, complete with bean bag chairs and an awesome reading area. I spent countless hours there reading or picking out books for my little brothers.
The highlight of my own book collection was definitely my impressive Babysitter's Club collection. At one time, I owed books one through 82 in the series. I think anyone that read these as an adolescent can resonate with the love and appreciation shown for this series. However, the series that I most remember devouring and loving is the Little House series by Laura Ingalls Wilder. From her first home in Wisconsin to moving in with her husband, we see Laura grow up and become a woman through much adventure and adversity. With Mary as the quiet fixture in her life and Pa as the one instigating her crazy antics, Laura is a character that you just can't help but love.
As I recently spoke about on my blog, I believe there is something in all of us that draws us to books with stories we will never experience. We live vicariously through the literature that we read and that was definitely the case with me and the stories of the Ingalls family. I will never make maple candy straight from the tree or watch my father build a home from logs that he cut down himself. This is the beauty of literature. We can transcend time and grow in our understanding of people by reading their stories and passing them on.
Thanks again Amber! I loved the post! I remember The BSC & Little House books! They were definite favorites! If you are interested in being a guest blogger for Memory Monday, in my blog for more info and the form, or shoot me an email!
XVI by Julia Karr is a dystopian novel set in an especially horrific world, especially for women. Feminism and equal rights have died out long ago in this society that brands girls when they turn 16 to physically and clearly announce to men that she is now of sexual age. This is viewed as an essentially open invitation for the men to take what they want, often without bothering to make sure the female is willing. After all, girls are taught by media, advertisements, even their own mothers that sex is desirable and it's just the thing to do. After all, all the cool girls do it.
But our heroine, Nina, is not interested in becoming just another mindless sex-teen. She's glad she's only 15, so she has the protection of a bare, tattoo-less wrist to ward off the desires and attentions of the men and boys who can and will take advantage of her once her birthday rolls around. Her mother has always been very vocal about her value as a person, as a woman, and has taught her to respect herself. But then again, her mom is dating an absolute slimeball who regularly beats her. Never mind the fact that he's already married. Nina hated Ed, but he's the father of her younger sister Ginnie, and her mom won't leave him, so she does what she can to stay out of him way.
While the premise to the story was intriguing, dark and horrifyingly dystopic, it almost felt like Karr had a few too many great ideas, and decided to incorporate them all. While a complicated plot can be a good thing, and more than one story arc is almost always positive, she had so many different facets to this story, so many subplots, new ideas, conspiracies etc that it overwhelmed the story and slowed things down, when it should have been speeding things up. Don't get me wrong. Each of the ideas were good, and could have been really solid. I actually liked each and everyone of them. But, no matter how great they are, some of them should have been cut, or the novel needed to be quite a bit longer to house each of them.
Because there were so many different plot arcs and great ideas floating throughout the story, a lot of the exposition lacked any read depth, as did some of the supporting characters. Like Ed. He is supposed to be pretty evil and seriously awful. I mean, if nothing else, he beats their mother. Men who beat up on women suck. Period. But other than that, we don't see Ed being evil. We know that he makes Nina's skin crawl and that she despises him, and she regularly calls him evil, but other than a few lurking, awkward moments, he never really acts terribly evil, just kind of creepy. It wasn't until the very end that I really started to feel that Ed was a seriously evil nasty, but that scene was over almost before it started. The build-up was intense, but the conclusion was a let down. This was pretty consistent throughout the whole novel.
Those two annoyances aside, I did actually really enjoy this debut. Karr holds a lot of promise as a writer, and her world building is delicious. To me, one of the main points of dystopian literature is to target and exaggerate a problem in our own society and demonstrate why it is so awful. XVI does this. I think that our society dangerously glamorizes teen sexuality and sexual activity, when psychologically, most teenagers are not ready to make that choice. They feel like they are, or they cave to pressure from their boyfriends, but it often has long-lasting psychological ripples. The media and propaganda are also hugely significant to this story, just as they are in our society now. It is almost impossible now to avoid advertisements and media spotlights, but it is impossible in Nina's society, because they follow you. In the beginning of the story, there is a short moment of dead air, which causes panic, because the people are so unused to silence.
I also really enjoyed the characterization of our main cast. Nina was a wonderful narrator, wanting to be strong and remain true to herself, but just experiencing the first stirrings of teenage love and infatuation when she meets Sal. I do think that Karr played this one a little heavy handed, but the idea was solid. Nina does not want to become another mindless sex-teen, so she fights against her feelings for Sal, who, although being confused, handles things quite well. And Nina becomes comfortable around him, comfortable enough that they can talk about how she feels she isn't ready to make that step, and Sal is perfectly fine with that.
As I mentioned, there were a few issues with the writing that didn't quite work for me. Parts of the story arc were given a very narrow focus, blocking out all else, while others were far too broad to really become invested in what was happening. But, overall, even with all that, I definitely recommend this novel. It is a fairly strong debut novel with a lot of potential. Hopefully Karr's writing will tighten up a bit in time for her next novel, which I believe is a sequel to XVI. And I, for one, am most definitely looking forward to it.
*Disclaimer: Received through Around the World Tours.
So, I'm entering another challenge. Sigh... But, in my defense, I actually think I'll be able to accomplish most of this challenge without trying too hard to find books I need to read, several of which I know are already on my to-read soon list. This will just... give them priority.
So, I'm joining the Kick Ass Heroine Challenge, because it's nice to focus on the super hard core female in literature.:)
You can read as many books as you want, but the minimum is 12, which is just one a month. And, since a lot of the recent fantasy/paranormal/sci-fi stories have seriously wicked female MCs. I've read a few recently, and plan to read several more soon, so it's not too much of a stretch to include a few more. I'm going to be 'safe' here, and just aim for 12, and if I happen to read more, more power to me.
Welcome everyone, with an especial welcome to Zohar! He is our very first guest blogger! I'm really excited to have him with us! Read is post, comment and let us both know what you thought, and then head on over to his site for a visit!
Bio:
Zohar is a father, husband and a new book blogger. He reads usually likes history and non-fiction books but generally reads everything he can get his hands on. His blogs features Pulitzer winning biographies, historical fiction, non-fiction and even graphic novels. You can find him at Man Of La Book
Post: ====================
My rating for Treasure Island — 5
About:
“Treasure Island” by Robert Louis Stevenson is an 1883 fictional adventurous and classic pirate story. The book follows Jim Hawkins, a young man, who has found a treasure map and with the help of friends hires a crew to find the treasure. But the crew has their own plans.
Thoughts:
I read "Treasure Island” by Robert Louis Stevenson as a young boy and always remembered it as one of my favorites. Recently, as part of a classics book club, I read it again.
The two main characters of the book, Jim Hawkins and Long John Sliver have certainly cemented themselves as two of the most intriguing and dimensional characters in literature. I was happy to reconnect with them almost as if they were old friends.
The first half of the book was a breeze to read, but the second half was a bit more difficult due to the pirate’s slang, cumbersome metaphors and tongue tied conversations. However, I quickly re-discovered that those quirks were part of the charm of the book. Even Jim Hawkins admits he has trouble understanding the narrative – so I wasn’t alone.
I read the Barnes and Noble classics version, which came with a fascinating biography of Stevenson especially regarding “Treasure Island”. The book was actually written for Stevenson’s stepson, after painting the island he started the novel and completed 15 chapters. Stevenson finished the book in Switzerland writing a chapter a day.
Unknowingly, Stevenson created much of the pirate lore which we have been accustomed to. The pirate speaking almost unintelligibly, a parrot on his shoulder, missing a foot and ready to double cross his best friends for a buck or two.
My biggest surprise upon reading “Treasure Island” as an adult was that I realized that the story is not about Jim Hawkins, but about Long John Silver. Granted that usually the villain in any book is usually more colorful and fun than the upstanding protagonist – but this discovery has taken by surprise. Silver’s moral ambiguity is well known but just how amoral the character is I never fully realized as a naïve child (even though I have become a naïve adult).
I was happy to discover that “Treasure Island” truly deserves its status as a beloved classic. The story is suspenseful and the adventure can be enjoyed by children of any age.
Synopsis:
In the mid 18th Century at a seaside village in south-west England Jim Hawkins, the young son of the keepers of the Admiral Benbow Inn, meets and old seaman named Billy Bones. Quickly Jim discovers that Bones is a pirate and that his old crewmates want Bones’ sea-chest.
Bones dies and Jim opens his sea-chest to collect the money owed to the inn – only to discover a mysterious oilskin packet. The packet is a detailed map of an island Jim, together with Dr. Livesey and Squire Trelawney, hire a crew to sail to the island.
But the crew are not the honest sailors they think they are and the sea-cook, Long John Silver, turns out to be the most dangerous one of them all.
