Saturday, January 22, 2011

Books Into the House

Mailbox Monday is a gathering place for readers to share the books that came into their house last week and explore great book blogs. This month's Mailbox Monday is hosted by Rose City Reader.

Here's what I received last week (bought from The Book Depository):

1) Anna and the French Kiss by Stephanie Perkins (I've heard so much raves about this one, so of course I wouldn't want to miss it!)

2) Fall For Anything by Courtney Summers (Have read several good reviews about this book as well.)

What books came into your house last week?



Library Loot is a weekly event co-hosted by Marg and Claire that encourages bloggers to share the books they’ve checked out from the library. If you’d like to participate, just write up your post-feel free to steal the button-and link it using the Mr. Linky any time during the week. And of course check out what other participants are getting from their libraries!

I didn't expect to borrow any books when I stopped by the library last Friday while doing my grocery shopping, but I found The Man from Saigon by Marti Leimbach. It has a setting of the Vietnam War and I want to read more books that feature this after reading and enjoying The Lotus Eaters by Tatjana Soli.

Hope everyone has a wonderful week!

Friday, January 21, 2011

Seriously?





 Classic?!?








Just found Michel Crichton in the "classics" section on Goodreads.  Really, Goodreads?  Even if I were guessing which authors from the late 20th century would eventually be classics, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have chosen Michael Crichton.  Don't get me wrong, I love his books, and the hot docs on ER got me through many a lonely night, but in the classics section?  Next to Picture of Dorian Gray, Heart of Darkness, and To Kill a Mockingbird?  I don't think so!  Forgive my bluntness, but it takes more than for the author to be deceased to make their works classic.  If I wasn't addicted to your bookswap, we'd be on a break!  Damn you, almost-free books!

Literary Blog Hop-Required Reading

Literary Blog Hop This week's topic for the Literary Blog Hop, hosted by The Blue Bookcase, is one that is near and dear to the hearts of every person ever to take a literature class.  Near and dear, that is, if you like to talk about books that you hated.  Here's the question:

Discuss a work of literary merit that you hated when you were made to read it in school or university.  Why did you dislike it?

Anyone who reads this blog even semi-regularly already knows of my hatred of all things Joyce (I'm looking at you, Portrait of the Artist!), so I will skip my usual diatribe against narcissistic stream-of-consciousness.  However, that means I can't really think of a book I had to read for one of my classes that I disliked enough to qualify for this question.  So, let's discuss a different but related question near and dear to my heart-why are certain works chosen over others to teach in high school and basic college classes?

This question occurred to me while thinking about books that I could write about for this post because in going through the ones I remember in my head, I realized that almost all of them have male protagonists or were written by men or both.  Now, granted, I was in high school and college in the 80s, but you'd think somewhere along the line I would have read a few women.  Let's examine the list of titles I can remember:

  • To Kill a Mockingbird
  • A Separate Peace
  • Lord of the Flies
  • Julius Caeser, Hamlet, Macbeth, and Romeo and Juliet
  • A Tale of Two Cities
  • The Iliad
  • 1984
  • Jane Eyre
  • Heart of Darkness
  • Death of a Salesman
  • J.B. (Archibald MacLeish)
  • L'Etranger (The Stranger)
  • La Peste (The Plague)
From that list, which spans mostly high school, there are only two female authors, and two female protagonsists-Jane Eyre and Scout from To Kill a Mockingbird-though Lee certainly goes out of her way to make sure we know that Scout is a tomboy, not one of those prissy girls.  Even the books I read in my French classes were male-centered.  While I enjoyed and appreciated most of these books well-enough, some diversity would have been nice.  After all, I enjoy vanilla ice cream too, but if all I ever ate was vanilla ice cream I'd never get to know flavors like rocky road or triple chocolate fudge ripple.

I thought that maybe this lack of female voices in my high school English classes was just a function of my age, so I decided to check out the books being taught the most today.  While my research is in no way scientific or exhaustive, by looking at the most popular SparkNotes I can say that students are looking for information on the following books more often than others.  And they are:


  • To Kill a Mockingbird
  • The Great Gatsby
  • The Adventures of Huck Finn
  • Lord of the Flies
  • The Scarlet Letter
  • Of Mice and Men
  • The Crucible
  • Catcher in the Rye
  • Frankenstein
  • The Odyssey
Seems like American high school students are still be treated to vanilla ice cream an awful lot of the time.

Now I can hear some of you saying, "Those are just the high school books.  You can read so many more diverse books in college."  Which is true-if you go to college.  And if you are in a major that requires more than basic English classes, where some of the above titles are actually repeated in more depth. So, why has so little changed in the 22 years since I graduated from college?  With the wide range of excellent literature out there, why are American high schools still stuck in a dead-white-guy rut?  Anyone have suggestions for title we could add to these old standbys? 
 

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

The Year of the Flood, by Margaret Atwood

There are some authors whose books I will read regardless of what they are about.  Often, I don't even know what they are about, because if I see the author's name on the cover I don't even bother to read the synopsis.  There aren't many of them, but one of my must-read authors is Margaret Atwood.  Ever since reading The Handmaid's Tale in college I have been a huge fan of her work.  The Handmaid's Tale literally changed my life.  Before then, I called myself a feminist because I was raised to believe that men and women are equal, but I had never really thought deeply about the issues that kept women from being full participants in the world's political and social realms.  Reading The Handmaid's Tale was an "ah ha" moment for me, when I began to truly understand the moral and ethical questions behind feminism specifically, and social justice movements in general. While none of her other books has had quite the same effect on me, I have read all of them with a sense of wonder and admiration at Atwood's ability to create characters and stories that examine some of our most complex social dilemmas, not to mention her ability to use language in a way that is sometimes raw and powerful, and other times transcendentally beautiful.


The Year of the Flood is her latest novel, and it is a "sequel" to her novel Oryx and Crake, though much of it takes place during the same time period as the first, focusing on different characters.  The novel is set in the not-so-distant future, when corporations have attained global dominance, and the planet is quickly apporaching ecological disaster.  It is centered around two female protagonists, Ren and Toby.  Both become a part of an eco-cult called God's Gardeners, a group who eschews the technological advances of modern society and preaches a return to the days when food actually came from nature and people were not treated as fodder-either labor or consumer- for the large corporations.  They believe that a "waterless flood" is coming, one that will sweep away all of mankind's corruption of the natural world, and they want to be prepared when it does.

As dystopian fiction goes, Atwood's near-future is as gritty and dark as can be imagined.  Human depredation has reached new levels, with the corporations greedily commodatizing all aspects of human life, including the sex trade and drug trafficking.  Most of the population lives on the edges of society, scraping by in whatever way-legal or illegal-they can find.  Anyone who runs afoul of the corporations can find themselves snatched off the street by the CorpSeCorp, the security arm of the multinationals that has replaced the armed forces and police.  While the richest and smartest live in walled compounds run by the corporations, the rest are left in slums called the "pleebs".  In the dangerous, crime-ridden world of the pleebs, helping your neighbor is likely to get you arrested or killed, and so a self-defeating selfishness has become the norm.  Like all repressive governments, the complete control of the CorpSeCorp has turned person again person, causing them to act in ways that are against their own interest.

As speculative fiction goes, I sincerely hope that the future Atwood envisions is wrong, wrong, wrong.  Sadly, too much of it felt completely possible to me.  From genetic manipulation to the power of the corporations to the suppression of dissent and the oppression of the people in the name of making money-all too close to reality.  In addition, now that most reputable scientists and rational people have come to accept global warming as a fact, it is not too much of a stretch to think that the destruction of the natural world that prefaces so much of what happens in the book could be around the corner.

Sounds depressing, right?  And this book certainly has its highs and lows in terms of emotional impact.  But ultimately there is hope.  When the "waterless" flood finally comes, those people who learned about the natural world and how to survive without technology and consumer goods were able to survive the chaos of the de-evolution of our society, and were able to begin rebuilding a world more in balance with nature.  As The Year of the Flood ends, the survivors are still finding each other, and I can't help but wonder what the next months and years hold for them.  Several websites I've found have described this book as the second in the MaddAdam trilogy, so I assume that I may yet get my wish to find out if there is indeed hope for the future-of Atwood's fictional society, and for ours.

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Wordless Wednesday


Like Father, Too Much Like Son?

Any consistent readers of this blog know that I am a superfan of Stephen King.  Despite his many books, the movies made from them, and his gobs of money, I believe he is under-appreciated in literary circles; dismissed as a genre writer, making his name by selling us the same story over and over.  While clearly not every book he has ever written is a literary masterpiece (though I've loved them all), The Stand, It, and The Dark Tower series are masterpieces, in my humble opinion.  As an avid reader and defender of King's literary merit, I was excited to discover that his son, Joe Hill, is also a writer.  I mean, surely the apple didn't fall far from the tree, right?

Hill's debut novel, Heart Shaped Box, is the story of Judas Coyne, and aging heavy metal star with an interest in the macabre and occult.  When an actual ghost is offered for sale on the internet, he can't resist.  The suit containing the ghost arrives in a heart-shaped box, and loses no time in terrorizing Coyne and those closest to him.

In my professional life, I'm taught to lead with the positive, so here it is-this books is scary.  I mean really scary.  I was creeped out pretty much from beginning to end.  It is fast-paced, and when the final show-down comes you are not disappointed.  The characters are pretty well drawn, and there is that subtext of redemption that is present in so many horror novels.  I did feel a little bit of whiplash at the beginning, as Hill wastes no time getting us into the action.  The characters stories are doled out a little at a time, which made the beginning a little disjointed for me.  But eventually all became clear, and there were some twists that I didn't see coming, which I always appreciate.

Despite that, I am left not loving this book, and I'll tell you why-it felt very much like one of his father's not-so-brilliant books.  It is clear to me that Hill has read everything his father has ever written, and whether purposeful or not, some of it ended up in this book.  I kept getting distracted thinking, "Oh, that's like in Christine", or "Hmm, that reminds me of Needful Things" and "Gee, didn't something like this happen in It?"  Yes, I realize that in the first paragraph of this post I said that I chose this book at least partly in hopes that Joe Hill would be like his dad-what can I say, I'm fickle like that!

I don't usually read other reviews of a book before reviewing it myself, but I did check some out for this book, because I thought that maybe I was imagining this Kingcentricness.  While most "official" reviews seem to praise it, the word on Goodreads and blogs is that people were disappointed-one even went so far as to say that Stephen King should be disappointed in his son.  I won't go that far, but I will say that unless Joe Hill, author, can find a way to distance himself from papa, he will probably continue to be perceived as Stephen King-lite, published more for who he is than what he writes.

Monday, January 17, 2011

Teaser Tuesdays

Teaser Tuesdays

TEASER TUESDAYS asks you to:

  • Grab your current read.
  • Let the book fall open to a random page.
  • Share with us two (2) “teaser” sentences from that page.
  • You also need to share the title of the book that you’re getting your “teaser” from … that way people can have some great book recommendations if they like the teaser you’ve given!
  • Please avoid spoilers!

It was the flowers that made it an herb beyond price, for their crushed petals, when mixed in specific proportions with vinegar and oak ash, produced an ink of rich hue, a splendid deep purple favored by kings and princes for their most regal decrees and beloved of bishops for the illustrated capitals in missals and breviaries. The capacity to produce a supply of heart's blood ink could make a man's fortune.



(Pg 25-26, Heart's Blood by Juliet Marillier)