I have just now (well, in the last three days) finished Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.
It wasn't for lack of trying. My friend, a huge HP fan, gifted me a hardcover copy of the book when I graduated from college. Now, I admit that I still would have been about a decade behind the original publishing date of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, but still it sat.
And after reading it, of course, I'm sad that it sat unread or rather barely read for two and a half years. I had started it a couple of times, but my brain got sidetracked by a book that seemed more adult, mature...like something I really should have been reading as opposed to the children's book I was reading. But what I found when I read it is that it's really a novel for any age and that being a little bit older only meant I could get through it a little bit faster than any of my 8-year-old counterparts.
I had so much fun reading this book, maybe because it is a children's book, but it was so darn enjoyable that I'm pretty excited about getting the second book...and then the third...and the fourth, etc. I realized while reading it that my novels don't have to be as intense or grown-up as I thought they needed to be and I can still get all the elements that I wanted: good characterization, well-defined plot points, suspense, well-written relationships/friendships between characters.
Besides, being an adult is so overrated.
And in this vein, I wanted to start a Harry Potter Christmas List, but then I realized that after reading Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief (which is what I'm currently reading) that I would want to add more than just Harry Potter related things so here's the modified version:
Fantasy-based Children's Literature Christmas List
Invisibility Cloak - enough said.
Owl and and Owlery to put said owl in - this also means Mogge and friends that you should expect your e-mail via owls now.
Quills - This is what you send your messages on with the owls, right?
Portrait - Of course this means that I would like a portrait where the person in it moves around. Next Christmas I'll ask for another one so that (s)he may have a friend to go visit.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
The Courage to Write by Ralph Keyes
I have been doing nanowrimo for the past two years. I can now say that I have written a novel twice over. As any nano'er can tell you, there is something amazing about giving yourself the freedom to write for quantity of words rather than quality. November is a magic time but once it is over, reality sets in. To complete a novel, you must actually make sure it is worthwhile for others to read.
I am afraid of becoming a trunk writer. Okay, I can assure myself that I will be a hard drive writer being as I lack the literal trunk. The fear still lives. For the past year, I have been sitting on a draft of a novel. My mom, dad and best friend have all read it and given varied levels of feedback. I have enrolled in two separate classes to help me polish the manuscript. I still haven't sent a single query letter. To say that Ralph Keyes' The Courage to Write: How Writers Transcend Fear struck a chord with me would be a understatement.
In the book, Keyes outlines the fear and anxiety shared by writers at all levels through comforting and reassuring anecdotes from some of the greatest writers in history. Every writer has to deal with fear and every page published is done in spite of that insecurity.
I recommend it to any writer. Somehow reading about the insecurities and failures of fellow writers simultaneously validates and negates the deepest fears of a writer.
Sense & Sensibility
Before I can begin a review of Sense & Sensibility, I feel as though I must mention a few things:
-I AM one of those girls who likes Jane Austen. I’ve embraced it and at this point you’re going to be forced to embrace it as well.
- While a fan, I have only read (and re-read in both cases) two of her novels, Pride & Prejudice being my first in high school and then later Persuasion. And I really love both of these books.
- I really like Emma Thompson.
So as I set out to read S&S, there was a high set of expectations, albeit Austen was competing against her own work, but nonetheless the expectations were high. I also read it knowing at the end of it I could reward myself with a viewing of the 1995 film adaptation starring Emma Thompson, whose work I generally admire, as our main character Elinor Dashwood.
The two other Austen novels that I’ve read have started off slow, solid, but slow. It took me about 60 pages, give or take, before I was really interested or invested. S&S was different. Perhaps this comes with age or being more familiar with Austen’s format, but I genuinely felt the book was just slightly more engaging from the get go. My theory is that the conniving, manipulative Fanny Dashwood and her too-easily-influenced husband have a lot to do with why it’s more interesting, but I could be wrong.
It might also have something to do with the relatable main character, Elinor. While I’ve always longed to be as spirited as Elizabeth Bennet or self-preserved as Anne Elliot, I’ve never been as much like them as I wanted to be. Having said that I’m not Elinor either, but her practicality and awareness of the brazenness of her sister’s behavior have me doing a double take at times.
So this makes me a fan of Elinor from the start. I like Marianne, too, but she’s a bit too blinded by her passion and inconsiderate of other’s to really win me.
There are lots of other players in this, which is par for the course. There seem to be more peripheral characters than there are in the other two Austen novels I’ve read, but the suitors are the most important. Here’s a quick break down:
- Mr. Edward Ferrars – a quiet, shy, very reserved suitor for Elinor. He’s a little bit like Elinor in his reservation, but he’s not as sure or confident of himself as Elinor is. He relies on his family to decide what career he will take and this makes him less appealing for me. It makes him seem weak. Now, I have to step back here and remember that this is how rich British people used to do it (maybe this is still how it is…I wouldn’t know because I don’t know any rich and/or British people). I always want to find him stronger than he really is in each scene, but it doesn’t happen until the end of the novel. However, when he finally does make a stand it isn’t for Elinor…it’s to prove his love of another woman (who, by the way, he used to love, but doesn’t anymore). So at this point he just seems silly, fickle, and still a little weak because he can’t bear to say “no” to the woman he no longer loves.
- Colonel Brandon – older, endearing suitor of Marianne. He truly seems to adore her. In the process of the novel he becomes good friends with Elinor as well which endears him to the reader even more, I think. He has a curious past, but one that actually makes him more attractive to Marianne. This little bit I won’t give away, but it’s good.
- Mr. John Willoughby – young, careless suitor of Marianne, and yep if you haven’t guessed it he’s our slightly less evil Wickham of the story. He’s sweet, well-intentioned at the time he falls in love with Marianne, but he has a truly shady past with one giant bad decision that puts him at odds with Colonel Brandon. It also sets him up to decide whether he marries for money or for love…guess which he chooses?
All of the predictable elements of Austen’s novels are there, but they are elements that I appreciate. There is a trip to London and one of the sisters gets sick. The trip and the unexpected illness set our ladies up for heartbreak as well as admissions from all interested parties about their past, their love, and inevitably their future together.
What I didn’t expect was that Edward wouldn’t be a likeable love interest for Elinor (at least he fell short for me). I didn’t expect that his love would seem fleeting or fickle. Ultimately his indiscretion make his feelings towards Elinor seem less genuine and makes me feel as though his character is more akin to Lydia Bennet. This is a huge character flaw. Don’t worry, he really does love Elinor at the end of it, but it’s less believable than Elizabeth and Darcy or Anne Elliot and Captain Wentworth.
This flaw led me to something more I hadn’t planned for. I began rooting for Colonel Brandon and Elinor to fall in love. Here me out. It’s not so far fetched, really. They become friends while Marianne is off being heartbroken. And yes, Brandon looks at Marianne dotingly, but I keep hoping that he only looks at her in such a way because he’s afraid of how her behavior affects Elinor. Besides, he’s older than Marianne and Elinor is the oldest. Also, he’s very sensible, much more like Elinor. But alas, this doesn’t pan out for me. Perhaps I’m the only one who wanted this, but in my head that’s how this book would end.
This leads me to my final conclusion: with a strong start Sense & Sensibility is a solid Austen novel, but overall not a favorite. The female characters, especially Elinor, were very relatable, but the male characters were not nearly as strong or likeable as the ones I’ve read before. Darcy and Wentworth have no fear of being replaced.
And as for the movie, it’s enjoyable. I like Emma Thompson, I really do, but the movie wasn’t what I would have visualized after reading the novel. Hugh Grant is more of a Willoughby than a Ferrars and Alan Rickman isn’t what I would have pictured the older Colonel Branden to be. Nevertheless, Sense & Sensibility is worth reading.
-I AM one of those girls who likes Jane Austen. I’ve embraced it and at this point you’re going to be forced to embrace it as well.
- While a fan, I have only read (and re-read in both cases) two of her novels, Pride & Prejudice being my first in high school and then later Persuasion. And I really love both of these books.
- I really like Emma Thompson.
So as I set out to read S&S, there was a high set of expectations, albeit Austen was competing against her own work, but nonetheless the expectations were high. I also read it knowing at the end of it I could reward myself with a viewing of the 1995 film adaptation starring Emma Thompson, whose work I generally admire, as our main character Elinor Dashwood.
The two other Austen novels that I’ve read have started off slow, solid, but slow. It took me about 60 pages, give or take, before I was really interested or invested. S&S was different. Perhaps this comes with age or being more familiar with Austen’s format, but I genuinely felt the book was just slightly more engaging from the get go. My theory is that the conniving, manipulative Fanny Dashwood and her too-easily-influenced husband have a lot to do with why it’s more interesting, but I could be wrong.
It might also have something to do with the relatable main character, Elinor. While I’ve always longed to be as spirited as Elizabeth Bennet or self-preserved as Anne Elliot, I’ve never been as much like them as I wanted to be. Having said that I’m not Elinor either, but her practicality and awareness of the brazenness of her sister’s behavior have me doing a double take at times.
So this makes me a fan of Elinor from the start. I like Marianne, too, but she’s a bit too blinded by her passion and inconsiderate of other’s to really win me.
There are lots of other players in this, which is par for the course. There seem to be more peripheral characters than there are in the other two Austen novels I’ve read, but the suitors are the most important. Here’s a quick break down:
- Mr. Edward Ferrars – a quiet, shy, very reserved suitor for Elinor. He’s a little bit like Elinor in his reservation, but he’s not as sure or confident of himself as Elinor is. He relies on his family to decide what career he will take and this makes him less appealing for me. It makes him seem weak. Now, I have to step back here and remember that this is how rich British people used to do it (maybe this is still how it is…I wouldn’t know because I don’t know any rich and/or British people). I always want to find him stronger than he really is in each scene, but it doesn’t happen until the end of the novel. However, when he finally does make a stand it isn’t for Elinor…it’s to prove his love of another woman (who, by the way, he used to love, but doesn’t anymore). So at this point he just seems silly, fickle, and still a little weak because he can’t bear to say “no” to the woman he no longer loves.
- Colonel Brandon – older, endearing suitor of Marianne. He truly seems to adore her. In the process of the novel he becomes good friends with Elinor as well which endears him to the reader even more, I think. He has a curious past, but one that actually makes him more attractive to Marianne. This little bit I won’t give away, but it’s good.
- Mr. John Willoughby – young, careless suitor of Marianne, and yep if you haven’t guessed it he’s our slightly less evil Wickham of the story. He’s sweet, well-intentioned at the time he falls in love with Marianne, but he has a truly shady past with one giant bad decision that puts him at odds with Colonel Brandon. It also sets him up to decide whether he marries for money or for love…guess which he chooses?
All of the predictable elements of Austen’s novels are there, but they are elements that I appreciate. There is a trip to London and one of the sisters gets sick. The trip and the unexpected illness set our ladies up for heartbreak as well as admissions from all interested parties about their past, their love, and inevitably their future together.
What I didn’t expect was that Edward wouldn’t be a likeable love interest for Elinor (at least he fell short for me). I didn’t expect that his love would seem fleeting or fickle. Ultimately his indiscretion make his feelings towards Elinor seem less genuine and makes me feel as though his character is more akin to Lydia Bennet. This is a huge character flaw. Don’t worry, he really does love Elinor at the end of it, but it’s less believable than Elizabeth and Darcy or Anne Elliot and Captain Wentworth.
This flaw led me to something more I hadn’t planned for. I began rooting for Colonel Brandon and Elinor to fall in love. Here me out. It’s not so far fetched, really. They become friends while Marianne is off being heartbroken. And yes, Brandon looks at Marianne dotingly, but I keep hoping that he only looks at her in such a way because he’s afraid of how her behavior affects Elinor. Besides, he’s older than Marianne and Elinor is the oldest. Also, he’s very sensible, much more like Elinor. But alas, this doesn’t pan out for me. Perhaps I’m the only one who wanted this, but in my head that’s how this book would end.
This leads me to my final conclusion: with a strong start Sense & Sensibility is a solid Austen novel, but overall not a favorite. The female characters, especially Elinor, were very relatable, but the male characters were not nearly as strong or likeable as the ones I’ve read before. Darcy and Wentworth have no fear of being replaced.
And as for the movie, it’s enjoyable. I like Emma Thompson, I really do, but the movie wasn’t what I would have visualized after reading the novel. Hugh Grant is more of a Willoughby than a Ferrars and Alan Rickman isn’t what I would have pictured the older Colonel Branden to be. Nevertheless, Sense & Sensibility is worth reading.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Twilight Questions: Is it gross?
Okay, now I'd like to pose a question:
When I first read Twilight, the main thing that made me want to toss it across the room had to do with Bella's urgent desire for Edward to turn her. Into a vampire. Who drinks blood and can't go out in public in the sunlight. Or live a normal life. It struck me as a perfect reflection of Bella's immaturity and short-sightedness that she would effectively fuck up the rest of her life without grappling with the consequences.
Am I just a bigot who needs to open up to vampire lifestyles or is it as gross as my instincts told me?
Addendum: the begging to be turned thing also seemed like a thinly veiled and effed up virginity metaphor, was I reading too much between the lines?
When I first read Twilight, the main thing that made me want to toss it across the room had to do with Bella's urgent desire for Edward to turn her. Into a vampire. Who drinks blood and can't go out in public in the sunlight. Or live a normal life. It struck me as a perfect reflection of Bella's immaturity and short-sightedness that she would effectively fuck up the rest of her life without grappling with the consequences.
Am I just a bigot who needs to open up to vampire lifestyles or is it as gross as my instincts told me?
Addendum: the begging to be turned thing also seemed like a thinly veiled and effed up virginity metaphor, was I reading too much between the lines?
Twilight: Mogge's Take
Yes, yes, yes! I must say that I agree with just about everything Keser had to say. Then again, I am pretty sure that I am the girl with matching opinions that she was alluding to!
As for the Angel comparison, I think having watched seven seasons of Buffy was a strong factor in my distaste for Bella. The romance between Buffy and Angel works as a tragic story in a large part because Buffy is already set up to die. Slayers don't retire; they die in battle. She is an extraordinary girl dealing with immense challenges. Angel's love for her is not just because she smells good or is a klutz. On that note, klutziness is one of the traits of Bella's that should have been endearing for me. I am utterly uncoordinated; especially in stressful situations. Or in my living room, where I have broken my pinkie toe four times. (No, that is not hyperbole). Even Bella's klutziness didn't work for me and that is mainly Edward's fault. He spent way too much of the book smirking at Bella indulgently or stifling his laughter at her behavior. That is not sexy. That is annoying. It is already kind of icky that this crusty old vamp is lusting after a sixteen year old, to have him act like she is a little girl rather than a grown woman is just disgusting. That brings up the main difference with the Angel and Buffy pairing. Angel respects her. He even admires her. She may not be his age or have the wide range of experiences that he has, but he never acts like her father. He wants to fight with her side by side.
Another human-vamp love that works in fiction is Sookie and Bill. In that case, Sookie's gift (and the danger surrounding her in her small town) pulls her toward Bill. Plus, Sookie is a grown up. I think the things about Bella that drive me insane are in some respects, the exact same things that annoy me about teens. She is self-centered and myopic. She focuses her life around some guy, who for the first hundred or so pages treats her like shit. She mopes around and usees the sweet little werewolf who just wants to be around her. I knew too many Bellas in middle school.
As for the Angel comparison, I think having watched seven seasons of Buffy was a strong factor in my distaste for Bella. The romance between Buffy and Angel works as a tragic story in a large part because Buffy is already set up to die. Slayers don't retire; they die in battle. She is an extraordinary girl dealing with immense challenges. Angel's love for her is not just because she smells good or is a klutz. On that note, klutziness is one of the traits of Bella's that should have been endearing for me. I am utterly uncoordinated; especially in stressful situations. Or in my living room, where I have broken my pinkie toe four times. (No, that is not hyperbole). Even Bella's klutziness didn't work for me and that is mainly Edward's fault. He spent way too much of the book smirking at Bella indulgently or stifling his laughter at her behavior. That is not sexy. That is annoying. It is already kind of icky that this crusty old vamp is lusting after a sixteen year old, to have him act like she is a little girl rather than a grown woman is just disgusting. That brings up the main difference with the Angel and Buffy pairing. Angel respects her. He even admires her. She may not be his age or have the wide range of experiences that he has, but he never acts like her father. He wants to fight with her side by side.
Another human-vamp love that works in fiction is Sookie and Bill. In that case, Sookie's gift (and the danger surrounding her in her small town) pulls her toward Bill. Plus, Sookie is a grown up. I think the things about Bella that drive me insane are in some respects, the exact same things that annoy me about teens. She is self-centered and myopic. She focuses her life around some guy, who for the first hundred or so pages treats her like shit. She mopes around and usees the sweet little werewolf who just wants to be around her. I knew too many Bellas in middle school.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)