Had this out of the library for a while, dipping into it off and on, hoping I'd maybe get into it. Answer: no. The stories feel totally mundane, non-r...moreHad this out of the library for a while, dipping into it off and on, hoping I'd maybe get into it. Answer: no. The stories feel totally mundane, non-revelatory. They don't have the punchy power that a short story should have (in my opinion and to my taste). And now there's a book I want more in at the library, and I need to make space on my card. 'bye, Emma Donoghue.(less)
I can't say I liked this book, but I have to give it two stars because Angela Carter's writing is so perfect, every word well chosen and well placed....moreI can't say I liked this book, but I have to give it two stars because Angela Carter's writing is so perfect, every word well chosen and well placed. The characters are unpleasant and the story mesmerising in its destructive horribleness, which made it brilliant and at the same time deeply unlikeable.(less)
I don't really get the pleasure of reading Angela Carter. Her writing is powerful, passionate (except where intentionally deliberate and emotionally p...moreI don't really get the pleasure of reading Angela Carter. Her writing is powerful, passionate (except where intentionally deliberate and emotionally parched), every word is perfectly chosen. I can imagine the editing that goes into it. But I just can't enjoy them. It makes me laugh when people say they don't get it because it's a literary text, and sort of assume that an English Lit graduate could manage it. 'fraid not. I find Angela Carter's work nigh on unpalatable, and would much rather read half a dozen Norse sagas instead.
And psst -- a secret: I hated the Contemporary Women's Writing module. I audited it, because I know this is a gap in my understanding, and I came to love Jeanette Winterson and Carol Ann Duffy and writers like that. But Angela Carter is apparently the point where I grumble and say that learning Anglo-Saxon is easier. (It is.)(less)
I don't trust Kazuo Ishiguro's narrators an inch, so reading this I just settled in and waited for her to reveal herself. I'm not entirely sure what e...moreI don't trust Kazuo Ishiguro's narrators an inch, so reading this I just settled in and waited for her to reveal herself. I'm not entirely sure what exactly happened in this novel -- I've got multiple interpretations turning over in my head -- but I loved it. The slowly building sense of something not being quite right, the odd moments of disquiet -- the fact that everything is implication works perfectly, for me.
It's not particularly surprising for Ishiguro's work, in that sense: it's very much his usual style and content. I enjoyed it a lot, but I can understand why people wouldn't -- it's quite devoid of content, it's all atmosphere, and even what's there isn't so trustworthy, so... there are no answers here, basically, no resolution, and that can feel very unsatisfying.(less)
I don't think I expected to like Middlesex. I've always heard about it, but never really been interested: it sounded like one of those books you read...moreI don't think I expected to like Middlesex. I've always heard about it, but never really been interested: it sounded like one of those books you read to be dutiful, as a chore. But it didn't turn out that way. It's genuinely enthralling -- perhaps not the most sparkling writing and narration, not exactly something set apart from everything else, but something where the narration didn't get in the way of the story. The switches between first and third person didn't bother me, and the ups and downs of the Stephanides family kept me interested (and not disgusted, because I've been a member of fandom since I was twelve; you see everything on LiveJournal, eventually). I sympathise with people who didn't want to hear about that, because it doesn't always seem relevant, but it all is -- and it makes the people human along the way, instead of just reducing them to "married his sister" and "married his cousin".
I sympathised with Cal a lot. I had an Object, too; I roiled with confusion over my feelings for a girl who wanted me to make all the moves (she wanted to try it but she wanted it to be my fault). Actually, I think Cal's Object is kinder than mine was, but anyway, I recognised that phase of being a teenager, that confusion.
There is something basically gender essentialist in Middlesex, or at least it sometimes seems like it, and that bothered me. Of course Cal turns out to be male, of course he likes girls, that's what the XY chromosomes do, right? And yet at other times that's not the case: Sourmelina, after all, is a ciswoman, and a lesbian. Maybe it's down to character? But technically Cal narrates the parts about Sourmelina too... Still, I thought that for the most part, Middlesex navigated this pretty well. In the blend of personal experience of invention, Eugenides came up with something that does feel real.(less)
The first narrator of this book is so boring, self-centred and wooden that I couldn't even get through her section. It's supposed to be a bit haunting...moreThe first narrator of this book is so boring, self-centred and wooden that I couldn't even get through her section. It's supposed to be a bit haunting, judging from people describing it as a "chiller" and so on, but... Eh, shrug. It didn't even keep me interested, let alone on the edge of my seat. It didn't help that I actually have done some academic work on the sagas and so on, and while I can't be sure -- it's not like I've read every saga -- the one Nina describes in the first section doesn't sound like any I know. The themes and so on could easily be an Icelandic saga, but digging around didn't produce any sign of the saga in question -- which is just lazy: use a real one, don't make one up, there's plenty!
(I may be wrong on this, especially since my checking-up involved trying to piece together what I remember of Old Icelandic, but it didn't feel right at all, especially with a key character called Kristin. "Kristin" isn't a name in Old Icelandic, it means "Christian". As in: "Hann var lengi konungr ok rÃkr. Hann tók fyrst kristni SvÃakonunga, ok um hans daga var SvÃþjóð kölluð kristin." 'He was long the king and rich. He was the first Christian Swedish king, and in his time Sweden was called Christian.' It just... doesn't smell right.)
It could've got more interesting, I suppose, but I don't have the patience to wait around for a decidedly mediocre book to get good.(less)
Not sure what to think of this one. It's beautifully written, and each story drew me in and made me question and tilt my head and try to figure it out...moreNot sure what to think of this one. It's beautifully written, and each story drew me in and made me question and tilt my head and try to figure it out, but I don't know if I found it satisfying. I wanted to know more -- of course, that's what you're meant to feel with this book, I think, so in that the author succeeds. But I look for satisfaction when I read a book, not to feel like it was a three hundred page tease -- I want a glimpse, if only a small one, into the heart of the work, the city. I wanted to go just a step or two closer to the Flâneur.
In practice, this book is not a novel but a collection of short stories, each of which is only mildly conclusive in itself, often almost circular. The opening story caught my interest with the narratorial voice, and some of the other stories in their pastiche styles amused me, but... it's like that line from The Vintner's Luck, flirtation and not love. I was entertained and amused, so it's not as though I bounced off the work entirely, but nor did I really participate.(less)
I have a rather bland shelf called "contemporary". That's what this book is going on, because it is not romance. It is a glorification of abusive rela...moreI have a rather bland shelf called "contemporary". That's what this book is going on, because it is not romance. It is a glorification of abusive relationships masquerading as BDSM. It's also really badly written. I winced through every sentence I read.
I made it through Twilight. I told myself that I should try and understand what the big deal was. So I thought I could manage at least the first book of this series.
No.
If you want something romantic, well, I have no experience with modern romance, but Mary Stewart's books are at least not creepy and stalkery like this (I found her Arthurian books misogynistic, but not her mystery/romances). If you want to read about BDSM, Jacqueline Carey's fantasy series, beginning with Kushiel's Dart, is better written and understands the mentality a lot better. Even better, it actually has a plot and likeable characters.
In fact, I could recommend just about every other book I've read over this.(less)
The repeated refrain of this book is about the main character not getting it, and I have to say, it was the most meaningful thing about it. I'm sure t...moreThe repeated refrain of this book is about the main character not getting it, and I have to say, it was the most meaningful thing about it. I'm sure this has all the hallmarks of great literature, since everyone says so, but I'll just remain glad that my niche of literary criticism involves books that are actually interesting...
There's very little by way of plot or character. Tony is bland, and annoyingly self-absorbed. His ex-wife and his relationship with her are about the most intriguing things about it -- I don't know why, I just like stories where people break up and they're still good friends -- and it's hardly the centrepiece.
Interesting collection, attempting to redress the balance of gender in writing about the Arthurian legends -- or the perceived balance of gender, anyw...moreInteresting collection, attempting to redress the balance of gender in writing about the Arthurian legends -- or the perceived balance of gender, anyway. It's a good collection, ranging from medieval writing to modern, and covering poetry, plays and prose. Some of it was already familiar to me (Marie de France, Sara Teasdale, Edna St. Vincent Millay), but quite a few of the stories and poems were new. Worth picking up, if the idea catches your interest.(less)
I didn't think I'd be the type to like Chuck Palahniuk's work, somehow. But Fight Club is iconic, and I haven't seen the movie, so I thought -- by my...moreI didn't think I'd be the type to like Chuck Palahniuk's work, somehow. But Fight Club is iconic, and I haven't seen the movie, so I thought -- by my dad's reasoning: he knows about the plots of soaps only because he says something you need to know to get on with other people, and possibly also to win pub quizzes, which both he and I do quite well -- that I'd better read it and find out what's going on.
I actually enjoyed it a lot. I meant to pick it up for five minutes, read just a little bit, and then get to bed in time. Half an hour later I looked up. Oops.
Despite never seeing the movie or reading the book -- despite not even being interested -- I figured everything out very swiftly, and I think it's because Fight Club is one of those things that you come across a lot in popular culture, and you just sort of learn about it by osmosis. Or maybe it was that obvious, I don't know, but I enjoyed the unfolding of it, even if I can't say I like the idea of a real Fight Club... I found it an oddly compulsive read for something I was so sure I wouldn't be interested in.(less)
I'm not sure what to think of this book. It's horrifying that it's based somewhat on fact, and it made me very uncomfortable as a reader -- partly bec...moreI'm not sure what to think of this book. It's horrifying that it's based somewhat on fact, and it made me very uncomfortable as a reader -- partly because it 's hard to tell where the reality ends and the fiction begins.
It's certainly something different, in any case. Parts of it are gorgeously written, though overall I didn't find the prose powerful exactly; even when writing of illness and death, this feels like a fable, like it's detached. Still, it's interesting -- and I think the first book I've read that so deeply involved AIDs, other than in the gay community.(less)
More for reference than something to read right through. Very useful, pretty thorough listings of Arthuriana from the beginning to very recently, incl...moreMore for reference than something to read right through. Very useful, pretty thorough listings of Arthuriana from the beginning to very recently, including historical fiction like Bernard Cornwell's trilogy. I checked it on a couple of things other books leave out, and it had them, so I'm pretty impressed.
Might be a good place to get recommendations, too. The contents is pretty thorough, should work to narrow it down, and it has a brief introduction to/discussion of pretty much everything it mentions.(less)
I see everyone who's followed my reviews for a while sighing. Yes, yes, I tried it again with Ian McEwan. Well, we read the first few pages in my crea...moreI see everyone who's followed my reviews for a while sighing. Yes, yes, I tried it again with Ian McEwan. Well, we read the first few pages in my creative writing class, and everyone talked about how brilliant it was, and you know -- at least with this one, I can see it. The slow unfurling of detail, the perfect use of imagery, making the reader believe in this relationship enough to care about the disastrous wedding night...
It's a little funny how the book talks about how they were just on the cusp of a sexual revolution, with the implication that they might have saved their relationship if only... But I think it could still happen -- just younger, and not necessarily within matrimony.(less)
Couldn't get into this one at all -- maybe it's the diet of pulpy SF I've been on, but I just couldn't find anything to hook me in. The social class s...moreCouldn't get into this one at all -- maybe it's the diet of pulpy SF I've been on, but I just couldn't find anything to hook me in. The social class stuff frankly bores me, and what I'd forgive in a literary classic I couldn't get on with it here. I read a chapter, put the book down to watch Captain America (my new weakness: Marvel superheroes, or at least those played by Chris Evans, Scarlet Johansson, Mark Ruffalo, Jeremy Renner and Robert Downey Junior) and couldn't even remember where I'd got to.
Should probably try it again someday, as I hear it praised a lot, but for now, not for me.(less)
I just wrote, in the answers to a survey thing doing the rounds on LiveJournal, that I've never been turned off a book by hype. Well, maybe I have bee...moreI just wrote, in the answers to a survey thing doing the rounds on LiveJournal, that I've never been turned off a book by hype. Well, maybe I have been. I found the advertising for this book on Goodread quite off-putting and obnoxious, even if it did make me curious about the book. That, in its turn, probably made me more impatient with the book when I did pick it up.
The structure of the book is interesting -- the intersecting lives, the jumping back and forth, the different ways to tell the story and the different voices. But that alone didn't make it interesting to me, personally. And none of the characters drew me on: there was no one I found especially compelling. I kept trying, a few pages at a time, but no. Just not for me.(less)
Oh, Jeanette Winterson, I do try to love you. But Written on the Body doesn't have much to hang on to except Winterson's prose, her brilliant imagery....moreOh, Jeanette Winterson, I do try to love you. But Written on the Body doesn't have much to hang on to except Winterson's prose, her brilliant imagery. It's like sinking into a warm bath of words, because she really does know how to use them.
But then the bath water gets cold and you have to get out.
Really, that's how I felt about Written on the Body. I like the neutral gender of the narrator-protagonist, and I like the intimacy of reading the book, the confessional nature of it.
But I don't even want to keep this one to read my favourite passages later.(less)
This short story is available at Tor.com, here. I didn't like it as much as The Memory of Wind; Rachel Swirsky's writing is as effective, here -- more...moreThis short story is available at Tor.com, here. I didn't like it as much as The Memory of Wind; Rachel Swirsky's writing is as effective, here -- more to the point, perhaps, sharper, somehow -- but it didn't sink its hooks into me. Perhaps because I didn't let it, because I've had therapy, and it is hard, and this situation just seemed... too easy. Even though it takes so many tries for him to get something that worked, it still seemed too easy. Perhaps if there had been more doubt, more emptiness at the end -- maybe if it had ended on the line, 'No reason at all,' where the reader is left to do that bit more work. If the story ended there, you're left to wonder if that scenario really did ever lay anything to rest, or whether the narrator was still left without any help. I guess because I believe that everyone is different, that no one thing works for everyone. I do believe there is a cure for everyone, but I don't believe in forcing everyone down the same path. I wouldn't even want my mind altered in this way.
Maybe the technology is possible, maybe it will be like that one day, but for now it felt like cheating. It didn't ring true.
(If you have triggers relating to violence and/or sexual abuse, I don't suggest you read this.)(less)
Tristan Hughes teaches at my university, and taught my housemate last semester. She's very enthusiastic about him, despite not having read any of his...moreTristan Hughes teaches at my university, and taught my housemate last semester. She's very enthusiastic about him, despite not having read any of his work, so I thought I'd give it a go -- it's in the library, after all, so no problem if it isn't for me.
It isn't for me, really, I don't think, but there was still stuff to enjoy there. Funny descriptions, and sometimes very apt descriptions, and scenes that evoked a lot of response. The book is made up of vignettes, most regretful, concerning people's lives in a particular local area, connected to each other by a shared history and geography.
The ones that got to me most were the ones about a man going blind and a boy whose father was suffering from PTSD in the wake of fighting in the war. The man who is going blind puts so much importance on what he's done in his life, what he's achieved, and so when he's going blind, he thinks about blinding himself on purpose, before his vision is completely gone...
Was he supposed to just wait while it did this, while it took what was left, to sit helpless while it worked on him. The silver so smooth in his hand -- it was in his hands, he could get rid of it now once and for all. Derrick imagined sitting in a darkness that he had made, and that would be forever his own.
And then the description of the boy's father's PTSD:
It was like some crazed and dementedly reductive dramatist who slashed up men's scripts and burned down their stages and left them with one scene, one act, one single passage, that they were cursed to play out again and again and forever.
I really enjoyed some of these images, even if the stories themselves were not what I'd seek out for fun.(less)
Fifty percent of the way through this book, I just started skimming it. The main character is not particularly sympathetic, and there's no one else re...moreFifty percent of the way through this book, I just started skimming it. The main character is not particularly sympathetic, and there's no one else really of note in that time, and the plot itself is pretty well-trodden. The myth it's supposedly based on doesn't really make an appearance in that half, either -- I normally like the Canongate series, at least as light reading, but really, not a fan of this one.
It isn't exactly fast-paced, and there's more than a whiff of male wish-fulfilment surrounding the main character's night with Jessica, given that in the morning after he makes it clear he doesn't consider himself attractive and has little confidence to make up for the unattractiveness.
I've been meaning to read or see The Vagina Monologues for a long time. Someone was talking about it, as people often do, and I realised it was availa...moreI've been meaning to read or see The Vagina Monologues for a long time. Someone was talking about it, as people often do, and I realised it was available on the Kindle store, so I got it.
It's a very quick read. It's not an easy read. There's discussion of self-loathing, of embarrassment and shame, of sexual assault and violence against women, of statutory rape. It might also not be easy for you if you can't read the word 'vagina' without getting uncomfortable, or if you don't like the word 'cunt', or if you wish that women wouldn't talk about 'down there' in public.
It's about that discomfort, and it's about shining a light on something that we don't talk about, that we are often taught to be ashamed of. A few years ago, I wouldn't have been able to stand the idea of reading it: right now, I can't stand the idea of performing it. And I'm not ready to talk to my grandmother about it! But maybe someday...
In any case, I think it's a very important idea, to talk about these things that we find so discomforting. How often have I heard men talking about their penises in public? Far more often than I've ever heard women do -- and often when we do, it's hushed and breathless and illicit.
On the other hand, I am not my vagina. I am not my physical form at all, personally. And it feels like this book does a lot of that -- distilling women down until the only important part of them is physical, sexual. For many women, that's not the truth, and it doesn't have to be. And the references in the foreword about not being able to write 'politically correctly', not being able to write about transgendered women -- I believe she should have tried until she got it, by talking to transgendered women, and talking to them again, and again, just like the one about the lesbian who said she was doing it wrong. And if she really, truly couldn't do it, then she should have stepped back and let a transgendered woman write it for herself, if her work is truly intended to be inclusive and about all women everywhere.
There's more I don't really engage with: I don't relate to questions like what would my vagina want to dress in, or what it would say. It's a part of me, not separate.
Everything has limitations, though, it's true, and this is a big step for many women. Hopefully fewer and fewer, as society moves on. I'm sure someone has written their own transgendered woman monologue -- I hope many have -- and I hope they're heard, too.
This particular edition, with the introduction by Gloria Steinem, is quite interesting, giving some historical/cultural context. It also includes a lot of stuff about people's reactions to "V-Day", which can be interesting to read. However, do note that the Kindle edition is badly proofread in places.(less)
I was rather sceptical about The Art of Racing in the Rain. I continued to be so as I read, even when I was more than halfway through. It bothered me:...moreI was rather sceptical about The Art of Racing in the Rain. I continued to be so as I read, even when I was more than halfway through. It bothered me: the description of Eve's illness, the situation with Annika. And I wasn't sure I was getting much out of it in return for getting so unsettled. I didn't think that much of the narration -- the conceit of a dog narrating the story. Parts just didn't go together: you can't have a really smart dog with ideas on philosophy who then gets confused about really simple things. Neither rang true.
But somewhere, around three quarters of the way through, I really began to care. And the emotional punches began to hit, until somewhere in the last fifty pages I found that I was tearing up that little bit (and I needed to blow my nose: gross, but true).
It's very hard to figure out how I felt about this book. I read it practically all in one go (curled up in bed with it angled to the light, getting a...moreIt's very hard to figure out how I felt about this book. I read it practically all in one go (curled up in bed with it angled to the light, getting a headache from tiny text, with a hot water bottle under my feet!) and it's still sort of sinking in. It felt like I was meant to read it all in one go, since it had no chapter breaks.
It felt rather... numb. Suicide normally touches me somewhere raw, but the suicides themselves seemed somehow ritualistic and the narrators, by not being startled, speaking from years later, added to that effect. It also feels inevitable: I wasn't reading in some kind of breathless anticipation, but rather with that sense of fate, inevitability, no surprises.
The narration itself is an interesting choice. Lots of people are describing it as a 'Greek chorus'; I don't know if that was the author's intent. That comparison sort of works, anyway. It felt natural for the story, and appropriate for the collective connection they felt to the girls. It felt least natural when separate boys were differentiated, and I was oddly less interested in them and more interested in the collective.
Interesting to read, anyway: the star rating may fluctuate as I absorb what I've been reading and figure out more thoughts on it!(less)
I got impatient to read blueeyedboy. You sort of expect Joanne Harris' work to show up in charity shops in short notice: I've found most of the rest o...moreI got impatient to read blueeyedboy. You sort of expect Joanne Harris' work to show up in charity shops in short notice: I've found most of the rest of her work there, in my charity shop binges, after all. But I got tired of waiting, and didn't want to wait until Christmas, so I actually bought it for the Kindle app on my phone. That made it very convenient to read a chapter here and there -- even two chapters while I waited for Delta Maid to get off the stage so Seth Lakeman would come on! -- so that meant I read this quite fast, but in snatches, whenever it was convenient...
The plot is very convoluted. There are so mistaken identities, so many unreliable narrators. The format itself is an unreliable sort of style: it's presented as an online journal-type site, very much like LiveJournal and its offspring, and we all know that people there can fictionalise their lives as much as they want. And you know the narrators are unreliable, and the further on it goes, the more you see that.
I was assured blueeyedboy was a big departure from Joanne Harris' usual. I really don't think so: her writing style bleeds through into the characters, and whenever she writes in first person or third person limited, her style bleeds through. There's something about it -- a hint of flavour, perhaps (appropriate, to be a synaesthete commenting on this book!), something in the phrasing... Anyway, that seemed typically her, and the darkness, the twisted relationships... I can see where in the rest of the work they come from.
blueeyedboy is dark, and not feel-good at all. The theme of food is there, but twisted, where before it's always seemed like a kind of good magic, in Harris' work -- although again, I can see a theme continuing, like the smell of oranges from Five Quarters of the Orange.
Interesting to read, but not so great a departure as I'd been led to believe, although without the comfort I've found in her other books, the way things tend to turn out okay -- changed, yes, but okay, with wounds lanced and poison drained, the danger faced and gone. Not so here. And even that's not new: The Evil Seed ended on a similar note. Not a departure at all, then.(less)
I normally love everything that Joanne Harris writes, but I found this one a bit too predictable, and the characters a bi...moreFifth book for the readathon.
I normally love everything that Joanne Harris writes, but I found this one a bit too predictable, and the characters a bit too much like others. 'Julian' had shades of blueeyedboy, mostly. The whole pattern of the book, too, the steady undermining forces and the final triumph, that's familiar from her other books as well. I don't think I was surprised once.
She does evoke the school environment very well, at least to the mind of someone who attended a private school. And there are some very good lines, for example, this: "At thirteen, everything counts; there are sharp edges on everything, and all of them cut."
A fun read, but not a great one, and definitely not something I'll read again.(less)
Simon Armitage's translation of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is certainly a very modern one. I think it's important to remember, when reading anyth...moreSimon Armitage's translation of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is certainly a very modern one. I think it's important to remember, when reading anything in translation, that nothing is immune to the translator's own views and intentions. This is especially apparent in translations like Seamus Heaney's translation of Beowulf, and this translation of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, but it's always the case. Even when it's a group of undergrads doing awkward prose translations -- I always use the example of Wulf and Eadwacer. There is no way you can translate that poem without personal interpretation. Even if you consciously translate the poem in order to keep all the ambiguities in place, that's an interpretation. Knowing this, and having read the introduction to this translation, it was easy for me to settle down and just enjoy Simon Armitage's translation. It's not literal, and it's colloquial, and it's contemporary, and it will probably quickly become dated. I don't think it's suitable for commenting on the poem in an academic context, unless you're actually commenting on the different translations, because it's very much an interpretation and in "plain English" and doesn't hold all the richness of the original.
It's also very readable, and rich in its own way. If you want to read Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and you're daunted by the idea of the "Old English"*, this translation is great -- lively and, I think, playful. I enjoyed the language a lot, not least because of how very Yorkshire it is (I grew up in Yorkshire). Armitage makes a good attempt at using the alliterative metre, and the poem practically begs to be read aloud and savoured.
The story itself has become less and less important to me as I've read the poem in various different translations (Armitage's, Brian Stone's, a prose translation, the original...) and instead I've found myself focusing on the tone of the poem (is the narrator being ironic?) and details like the missing day (count 'em up carefully), and the use of adjectives ("good Gawain", etc). Still, there's an interesting story there, too -- the testing of Sir Gawain, a tension between courtly manners and Christianity, etc, etc.
*It's actually in Middle English, and all of the translations will be Modern English.(less)
Loading...
