forgive me father, for i have sinned. it’s been a long time since my last confession. these are my sins:
i bought rossetti’s goblin market and se...more1.75/5
forgive me father, for i have sinned. it’s been a long time since my last confession. these are my sins:
i bought rossetti’s goblin market and selected poems as an expensive a folio edition, because i enjoy a good story as much as thoughtfully crafted book design. plus i only understood fractions of it, the writing style is not much to my taste, but that might change if i understand the subtle undertones and messages the author is trying to convey.
this is it, you guys. you cannot get a better designed book if you’re looking for a collection of rossetti’s poems. and … holy shit, it’s just awesome because jillian tamaki illustrated it! [ see more ]
obviously the most famous of her poems is the goblin market. i had my first encounter with her work through laini taylor’s beautiful book lips touch: three times which can be discribed as a nod to rossetti’s poem. here some of my favourite lines:
two thoughts of death.
her heart that loved me once is rottenness now and corruption; and her life is dead [...] foul worms fill up her mouth so sweet and red; foul worms are underneath her graceful head. yet these, being born of her from nothingness these worms are certainly flesh of her flesh.
- p 114
buds and babies
a million buds are born that never blow, that sweet with promise lift a pretty head to blush and wither on a barren bed and leave no fruit to show.
sweet, unfulfilled. yet have i understood one joy, by their fragility made plain: nothing was ever beautiful in vain, or all in vain was good.
- p 100
life and death.
life is not sweet. one day it will be sweet to shut our eyes and die [...]
life is not good. one day it will be good to die, then live again. [...]
- p 72
when i was dead, my spirit turned to seek the much frequented house: i passed the door, and saw my friends feasting beneath green orange boughs [...]
emily webster and the class of 1912 are graduating from high school. for emily's friends, it's the beginning of a new chapter in their lives as they p...more emily webster and the class of 1912 are graduating from high school. for emily's friends, it's the beginning of a new chapter in their lives as they prepare to go to college. but not for emily. despite her love of learning and her academic achievements, she will be spending her next year at home. she is an orphan whose only living relative is her elderly grandfather and she feels it is her duty to take care of him. when her classmates leave home, emily becomes lonely and depressed during her "lost year." but with a little dedication, emily eventually finds that learning can take place outside of the classroom and you don't need college to grow as a person. [ foreveryoungadult ]
the plot: raised first by unkind relatives and later relegated to a hellish boarding school, the orphan jane learns to rely on her own inner strength,...morethe plot: raised first by unkind relatives and later relegated to a hellish boarding school, the orphan jane learns to rely on her own inner strength, moral convictions, and religious faith. she takes a job as a governess for the ward of the reclusive edward rochester, only to fall in love with him (view spoiler)[and accept his marriage proposal. on the day of their marriage, jane discovers that rochester is already married, to a madwoman whom he can't divorce. she leaves him, ends up in the house of her long-lost cousins, and discovers that an uncle has left her money, but before her domineering, missionary-in-training cousin, st. john rivers, can whisk her off to india to be his helpmeet, jane senses that rochester needs her and goes back to him. she discovers that rochester's wife set the house on fire, and that he was gravely wounded in a failed attempt to save her life. rochester acknowledges his guilt in trying to force jane into a bigamous marriage, and the two eventually marry (hide spoiler)].
the good: primarily, what's remarkable about jane eyre is the character of jane herself--a steely, self-assured young woman who takes charge of her own life. despite a soul-killing experience as a teaching drudge at her boarding school, jane's spirit is never broken. when her situation at the school becomes unpleasant, she make the decision to change her life and acts upon it with courage and decisiveness--no mean feat for a 18 year old girl with no money or friends in 19th century england. she holds her own against rochester's passive-aggressive mind games until the guy actually offers her a substantial emotional commitment, and she refuses to allow him to change her or compromise her sense of right and wrong. the only person who comes close to dominating jane is her terrifying cousin st. john, who all but stalks her in her own house as he tries to convince her to throw her life away in the service of god (and of himself), but jane manages to shake him off as well, and as the book ends she is the mistress of her own life.
even more intriguing is the fact that throughout her perils of pauline, jane remains believably and lovably human. she's steely, but not hardened; moral, but not preachy; religious, but not a proselytizer . for all her superhuman accomplishments, jane has unmistakable feet of clay, and nowhere is this more apparent than in her obvious sexual attraction to rochester. although it's never spelled out, there's a prominent undercurrent of desire in each of their shared scenes, which gives both the characters and the relationship an added dimension that's all-too-often missing from 19th century romances. unlike too many other brontë heroines, jane isn't ruled by her desire, but the fact of its existence arguably makes her triumph over it a greater moral accomplishment than anything we see from austen's heroines, for whom sexuality is a non-issue.
the bad: in a room of one's own, virginia woolf wrote of jane eyre that "it is clear that anger was tampering with the integrity of charlotte brontë the novelist. she left her story, to which her entire devotion was due, to attend to some personal grievance." woolf is referring here to a scene in which brontë allowed her own anger at being shut away from the world take over jane's thoughts, but to my mind the same sort of score-settling is obvious in the novel's first segment, the monstrous lowood school. charlotte herself spent several years at such a school and watched her two older sisters, maria and elizabeth, succumb to illness due to the poor conditions there. as a result of her still-simmering anger at this mistreatment, the lowood section is disproportionately long, and features some of the most obvious moralizing in the book.
but the lowood section does end, and if it (and the rather absurd deus ex machina that is Jane stumbling, in the middle of a cold and rainy night, on a house that happens to contain her long-lost cousins who have just been informed of the fact that Jane has inherited a fortune) were the novel's only flaws, it would still have a very near claim on perfection, but where jane eyre fails is in its fundamental perception of itself as a romance. the book offers a bleak vision of what an intelligent, strong-willed woman can look forward to when she goes searching for a mate. if she's lucky, she can avoid the fate of being shackled to her intellectual superior, who will bully and belittle her, use her for his own purposes with no regard for her identity or personhood. but, out of the frying pan and into the fire! for, as brontë tells us, the intelligent woman who avoids this fate has only one other option: to be tied down to a needy, selfish, intellectual inferior, and spend her life as his savior, his mother, and his nurse. there's no question that rochester undergoes a change over the course of the novel--from a man whose every early conversation with jane revolved around how she might help and save him, he learns to think of the needs of others, and he has the scars to prove it--but not enough to make the notion of someone as remarkable as jane wasting herself on a person whom she will soon outstrip in every regard at all palatable. to put it simply, jane eyre is about as romantic as carrie.
"all of the characters and storylines in this work are fictitious."
not so far from the truth afterall ... graham young, (1947-1990), an english serial killer. he is notable for his obsession with the use of poison, and for having been imprisoned for murder in his teens, only to kill again after his release. he was fascinated from a young age by poisons and their effects. in 1961 at 14 he started to test poisons on his family, enough to make them violently ill.
"none of the information enclosed is for practical use and is in no way intended as a guide."
oh, but it is.
"plant poisons can be dangerous when used incorrectly and should only be handled by a qualified professional. the moral of the poison diaries is that plants can kill."
an ayn rand book (..) means it also comes with all the objectivist baggage: an over-wrought style of writing, a general hatred for humanity, simp...more1.5/5
an ayn rand book (..) means it also comes with all the objectivist baggage: an over-wrought style of writing, a general hatred for humanity, simplistic philosophy, a deep love for nothing except the writer's own ego. [ marvin ]
in 1963, a sixteen-year-old high school student named bruce mcallister sent a four-question mimeographed survey to 150 well-known authors of literary, commercial, and science fiction. did they consciously plant symbols in their work? he asked. who noticed symbols appearing from their subconscious, and who saw them arrive in their text, unbidden, created in the minds of their readers? when this happened, did the authors mind? [ article ]
surveys in facsimile: jack kerouac, ayn rand, ralph ellison, ray bradbury, john updike, saul bellow, norman mailer.
Are you ever worried about offending people? pullman: I think there's a difference between (a) offending people for its own sake, which I don't necessa...moreAre you ever worried about offending people? pullman: I think there's a difference between (a) offending people for its own sake, which I don't necessarily want to do, because some people are good and decent and it would be unkind to upset them simply to indulge my own self-importance, and (b) challenging their prejudices, their preconceptions, or their comfortable assumptions. I'm very happy to do that. But we need to be on our guard when people say they're offended. No one actually has the right to go through life without being offended. Some people think they can say "such-and-such offends me" and that will stop the "offensive" words or behaviour and force the "offender" to apologise. I'm very much against that tactic. No one should be able to shut down discussion by making their feelings more important than the search for truth. If such people are offended, they should put up with it.
Why do you think it's so important that young people read? pullman: For the same reason that I think it's important that they breathe, eat, drink, sleep, run about, fool around, and have people who love and look after them. It's part of what makes us fully human. Some people manage to get through life without reading; but I know that if I'd had to do that, an enormous part of my mind, or my soul if you like, would be missing. No one should be without the chance to let their soul grow.
If you've read any Tolkien, what do you like about the way he writes? Did it inspire you to write any of your books? pullman: I read The Lord of the Rings when I was 18 – I read it greedily, lapping it up, eager for more. But I haven't read it since then, though I've tried. It doesn't satisfy me any more, and I think that's because Tolkien, who created this marvellous vehicle, doesn't go anywhere in it. He just sits where he is. What I mean by that is that he always seems to be looking backwards, to a greater and more golden past; and what's more he doesn't allow girls or women any important part in the story at all. Life is bigger and more interesting than The Lord of the Rings thinks it is. (joe's comment: ♥)
Despite its big overseas earnings, the novel-based film The Golden Compass might not be followed by a sequel following its disappointing run in the United States last year due in part to boycott calls by Christian conservatives.
Before its release, The Golden Compass received heavy criticism from some faith-based organizations for the source material's anti-Christian and atheistic themes, as well as from secular organizations and fans of His Dark Materials for the dilution of the religious elements from the novels.
While the film was successful overseas, making around $300 million, it made only $70 million in the United States, which some attributed to the boycotting of the film.
i truly hate this book! i had to read it in class once and create a frikking presentation. my mood drops several degrees when only thinking about this...morei truly hate this book! i had to read it in class once and create a frikking presentation. my mood drops several degrees when only thinking about this crappy book!
oliver twist was a pain in the ass to read, with its slow paced writing it took all my will to keep reading. it was a tough struggle, but i won. olive...moreoliver twist was a pain in the ass to read, with its slow paced writing it took all my will to keep reading. it was a tough struggle, but i won. oliver twist has been on my to-read-list for some time now, while i can’t say the book amazed me ... i’m still glad i could finally bring myself to read this piece of classic literature. i think one of the many reasons i decided to give it a shot (besides it being a part my english classes in school), is definitely that both my parents have read the book many times (in school) and loved it.
charles dickens illustrates the life of the poor in the 19th century, taking place in england and gives them a voice through the eyes of an innocent child: oliver twist. we get to accompany him through joy and sorrow. he gets bruised, beaten, abused, humiliated and shot at. in the end though, (view spoiler)[he gets his own happy ending by inheriting a fortune, but most importantly by being loved. (hide spoiler)]
i can see why dickens became famous at his times, just like harriet beecher stowe was, when she published uncle tom's cabin(view spoiler)[which became the second best-selling book (hide spoiler)]. both people, giving voices to the suffering/poor/pariahs, who got overlooked most of the time.
although charles dickens is and was known for being overly dramatic, it helped him make a point. otherwise, the book would not have been able to become what it is today. a classic. in the victorian era, where most of the victorians showed only indifference to the plight of the poor, dickens’ writing style helped serve his purpose, which was to change society’s views of the abuse of children.
oliver, our protagonist is actually not a very believable character, considering how he grew up and was treated like. the author described all of his book’s characters as being either good or evil, which was easy enough to guess, when he defined their appearance. black or white, with no shades of gray. the power of oliver’s complexion is emphasized, through his noble manners despite all the ugly things that happened to him. the same way oliver, rose and harry are described as beautiful, fagin and sikes are uglified. the external appearance gives the reader an impression of the person’s inner character.
he described with a good dose of humor or rather sarcasm the hypocrisy, laziness, greed and arrogance of the upper class people. but despite all that, oliver twist is able to experience the friendliness of strangers. oliver, indeed, was an extremely lucky boy to have so many strange people help him out, especially when compared to his peers (e.g. dick). all the characters that ill-treated him or were evil either (view spoiler)[died or have had bad things happen to them in return, (hide spoiler)], which is dickens’ way of telling us readers that “you shall love your neighbor as yourself.” ["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>(less)