Becky's comments (member since Apr 28, 2009)

Becky's comments from the Wild Things: YA Grown-Up group.

Oh... I see. LOL

What's ironic about reading the book on October 31st?

I just googled it, and Gaskell was 44 when N&S was published. She was 38 when her first book was published anonymously.

Anyway... I'm not trying to argue, LOL. I'm just had to throw my opinion out there because I would never have thought of this as a YA book. But hey, if teens or whoever read and enjoy it, more power to them! :D

I know that there doesn't have to be a child in the story to make it appeal to YA, but there does have to be someone that the reader can identify with or at least understand. I just didn't feel that there was. Nobody's motives were really explained, they just acted and then justified their actions based on other people's interpretations of them. I, for one, never felt like I understood any of the characters at all.

In addition, I was so frustrated with the constant philosophizing and exposition, and that I just didn't enjoy it.

I'm sure that there are people who would enjoy the book for the reasons you mention, like I said, I can't speak for everyone, but I just can't see the appeal for a lot of people.

I know what you mean about reading classics at a young age... I did the same and loved them - for instance I distinctly recall reading A Tale of Two Cities in school and really enjoying it, and that's one that you and Laura both disliked.

*shrug*

OK but what would appeal to them? And what do you mean by "advanced"? (I'm using "kids" as a general term, not meaning anyone under 12 or so, though.)

Just out of curiosity Fi, why do you think it would appeal to kids? And which age group? They'd definitely have to be older, like you say, but I just can't see even teens making it through the whole book unless it was required reading.

I have to disagree... I thought the book was FAR too wordy and lengthy and philosophical to be entertaining to most kids. The characters are all adults, so there is nobody that a kid could identify with, there's tons of religious philosophical and historical references that aren't explained enough for even ME to understand, so I doubt a child would get them, and the romance part comes so late that even I was tempted to chuck the book at the wall. Not to mention the socio-political themes throughout. Jeez.

Granted, I can't speak for every kid, but I found myself bored of N&S at times, and I just think it wouldn't have very much appeal to kids. At least when Jane's story started she WAS a child and we got to grow with her. Oliver of course is classic YA.

And I didn't really care for the mini-series either. It WAS better than the book, but I never finished it. With the exception of Nicholas Higgins, there really wasn't a single character that I really liked. Everyone was too proud and made too many assumptions and refused to see anyone else's point of view on anything. Higgins was the same, but he had the benefit of loving his daughter and being POOR, which made his pride acceptable to me.

Anyway, I'm rambling.

The guy who plays Thornton in the series is good looking, but as a character, he's got nothing on Darcy to me. Sorry.

Umm... I've never heard of this book, and the description here on GR doesn't tell me much about it at all...

Misty, or anyone who's read this, would you care to tell us a little bit about this one? :)

Oh no, the fairy's here too! Where's that doxy spray? :P

I dunno... some misspelling fairy just came in here and tried to ruin EVERYTHING. Luckily, our mod is on top of things and quickly shooed that darn fairy right out of there!

Psst.. KristIn. :P

Psst... Fi, you spelled the author's name wrong. It's Kristin, not Kirsten. :)

I agree. That is THE best first line. It really has so much POTENTIAL in it.

This series is due for a re-read REALLY soon. I miss it. *sigh*

Heather wrote: "BunWat and Malcolm, thanks for those insights. This soul stuff has the potential to be endlessly fascinating. Too bad it has a tendency to get ruined by organized religion. "

Doesn't everything?

Lydia, I think you're right - I remember thinking something similar. It did seem to be worded in such a way that Pan had more leeway on the ship than he did whenever they would test it. I seem to recall it being something like 10 feet when they were testing, but it definitely had to be more than that for him to fly with the ship, or even swim next to it.

Although, maybe "testing" created its own kind of barrier. Knowing that it will hurt to be separated by a certain distance would inhibit me, and would make me want to lessen the separation - but maybe when they were on the ship, they weren't thinking about the fact that it would hurt, and were just having fun and new experiences, and in doing so, realized (but maybe not consciously) that their boundaries weren't as limited as they thought because they weren't waiting for the pain?

Just a thought. :)

I remember really wishing for a daemon myself when I read these books.

I think mine would probably be a cat.

This conversation is very interesting... I think one day I may have to re-read the series again, as this is making me remember it in a different light.

How are you liking The Boy in the Striped Pajamas?

It's soooooo good. I have 110 pgs to go, and I just started it this afternoon. I would have finished it entirely, but I came to a very convenient stopping place and I have to work in the morning. :)

I'm currently reading Graceling... and loving it! It's very good so far! :D

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editor...

Stumbled across this one today. Lovely.

"Oh no!! We can't endorse your book! It has... err... *mumbles* in it... I think...?"

That's. Scary. At least if you're going to argue against something, have a reason!