C. (Comment, never msg).’s Comments (group member since Jan 30, 2014)

C. (Comment, never msg).’s comments from the Gentle SPECTRUMS group.

I was a baby when those friends were in the order. I was the first infant they held. My Parents showed them how to do it. They retired after my Brother was born. They were at all birthdays until we were 18. As teachers, their focus was our French and education. I thought of asking about their nun life later. When I asked why numerous items were discouraged, they said the logic was "Why have all of that"?

I greatly appreciate the items that are personally meaningful to me. Others are useful. Liking many books, music, and films takes space; therefore I am pairing down. I would anyway but we have small rooms that challenge me to free up space sooner. I stock up on the items we do consume like books and music, if they are at good bargains. The books and music I don't keep will even out. You know we needed to quickly store family items. It is a challenge to clean our library enough to advertise for customers. I may sell some books on-line for pick-up: name a few authors. Different from Rebecca, I value and use what I bought in bulk, when prices were right.

Sophie Kinsella has great ideas for building personalities and stories she thinks are relatable but is not a strong writer. Ideas aren't enough if they don't work realistically, especially behaviour. The convent should have been the jewel moment of the novel. We would like Rebecca for enjoying the quietude and pleasant conversation with a respectable elder. Rebecca would learn from the lady, a completely new consideration of want versus plenty. Get what you need and enjoy it. The Vera Wang dress had a happy memory for Rebecca as much as the scarf. She might have kept those and a basic wardrobe for all seasons.

The items I cherish poignantly are many. Price stops things I would highly enjoy. I deemed it worthwhile this Christmas to splurge on quality soaps and a healing gel that I am amazed with and grateful to have. Our skin is the largest organ: keep it healthy with pure, natural ingredients. They were Ron's gifts, which he likes, while also helpful to our household. We used the soaps and shampoos from my Parents.

You aren't more "aware of" immunity than Mom taught us to be. I meant we believe it is healthier and strengthens our immunity to get out in the world. Stay away from known colds or infections of course. But to never share products because "someone might have an unseen cold" means being wary for life and I refuse that. I'll simply respect not borrowing some (or any?) of your makeup. I understand the worry you were born under.

Think of the boy in "The Secret Garden". Think of what Donna Eden teaches about the radiant circuits and triple warmer of freedom and joy spreading through us. That boy did better when he played outside and dared to strain his stamina. I saw freedom and happiness work for Marigold, the last day of her dearly beloved life. After desperately giving her fluids, keeping her in bed would have felt glum. I let her outside and boy, did she perk up and play! She ran, jumped, and savoured the rains of sun and air in her favourite places. Thank goodness, when it turned out to be her last time.

When we moved, I took a few months to go back to the city. I always felt sick around cigarettes but saw how much resistance I had built, unknown until I stepped out of public. I went to my chiropractor and smoke on the sidewalk hurt in one of the worst headaches I remember having. We can't all live in nature, so it is good that city folks build resistance to some pollutants. Be outside enough, doing a little exercise or deep breathing, to empty toxicity out. I need to resume Donna's daily exercises to keep my energy, blood, lymph, and cerebrospinal fluid pumping.

It was the authoress, not Rebecca, who ruined the sweet moment with Luke in New York, if you see what I mean. They should have been alone speaking privately but I think each should have phoned the other before Rebecca thought of moving. London is as huge as New York, I think. I said I read of London personal shopping assistants in "Thirteen Little Blue Envelopes", in my last entry. She could have a dream job without moving.

See what can be salvaged of your relationship prior to creating a new life. Sophie in 2001, was far too late to entertain us with the "Run to the airport" cliché. "Friends" wrote it very creatively, with Ross playing his answering machine and wondering if Rachel flew or not. The last time I saw an airport scene portrayed convincingly was Michael Scott's departure from "The Office". Jim warned Pam that he suspected Michael was leaving that day, secretly.

For two books following one character's point of view, we saw NOTHING she likes doing besides shopping, not even a wonderful walking tour of New York. Rebecca mentioned watching "Friends" and loved the peace of the convent and was awed by the stained glass window.

Thank you for telling me about the show "Absolutely Fabulous". I don't find British comedy funny. Once you are over the shock of how nude or silly they were willing to get; it is boring. I couldn't take a whole episode of Ricky Gervais' version of "The Office" (I appreciate that he paved the way for my favourite one). The previews of their version of "Ghosts" look stupid. I think British television like "Call The Midwife" and action like "James Bond" and "Harry Potter" excels outside of comedy. The actors, comedians, and Graham on "The Graham Norton Show" are wonderfully funny; so it must be scripted comedy that is not for me.

David Schwimmer was the only thing in "Intelligence" not painful to watch; so unfortunately, it isn't that I only saw old-fashioned comedy. Some British people are naturally funny and I appreciate those candid settings. Watching them tell self-deprecating stories about themselves is wonderful. Including Patrick Stewart joking to "not be afraid" of the original length of his autobiography which was cut and how he and his Star Trek castmates still rib each other.

Rebecca primarily bought clothing but we didn't see her enjoying it beyond infatuation with brand names; except her scarf and Vera Wang dress creating memories for her. What the heck is "Clementine"? It isn't a colour or material. I worked in a clothing store. I had a discount but did not buy anything I didn't need and didn't make a dent in any paycheque, believe me. I would enjoy watching someone shop at a music store because we would see their excitement for singers. Even knowing one of these novels is about a baby, has me cringe because Rebecca will splurge on unneeded baby outfits.

I am boring but comfortable at home alone. You know I wear the same shirt and pants until I decide they need to go in the washer. I leave off makeup at home, unless we are taking home photographs, or having friends or family over. Shows and whatnot I have seen, remind me to be dressed and bathed before Ron is home and to spruce up my outfit sometimes. We are comfortable in sweats here, especially in winter but I want Ron to come home and be greeted by a nicely dressed lady once in awhile.

Clothing can mean a lot and as you complained in the first novel, Rebecca's clothes shopping is empty and mindless. Only when she styled Tarquin and the New York customers, did fashion intuition come out and be interesting for us. However, since I am not nuts about fashion, I like people to share more traits than that about themselves.

Rebecca should not blow off a tour of museums or city walking. I will only say I get that famous stores are fun for her to see in person, like famous places you & I have dreamed of seeing. Did I tell you about unthinkingly startling my penpal while he was driving? He picked me up from the airport and I had my first look at Los Angeles. He was freaked out that I screamed. He understood and regained his breath, after understanding that I'd had my first sight of the "Hollywood sign": in person! It is farther away that anyone images. Television makes it close-up. You would have to go to a special place and hike on a hill to sit on it. I saw it, a symbol I had grown up thinking of as a fantasy place that I was unlikely to visit! I was there!

It is occurring to me that it is best not to be the driver whenever I make my dreams come true. Ron was driving when I not only shouted but swore, upon my first sight of Stonehenge!

We can read "The Second Sisterhood Of The Travelling Pants" this spring. We are overdue to read "The Kitchen God's Wife". What do you say? I commented in several of your review spaces, including seeing your note that you have Amy Tan's book now.

Jann Arden is on "The Social" today, discussing a new album called "Jann's Mixtape". She is as instantly hilarious as always. When you are done watching and reading about plagues and other depressing things, I DID send you her first book. The fun thing is that she includes a cassette version of her "Mixtape" album literally! That is brilliant.

I have enough cassettes that I haven't played in years but think Ron, Mom, & I have a walkman between us that works. I have so many more Jann Arden songs to give you, keep playing the artists I have sent!

Now let me correct the impression of my grade: I hated the character, author's style, and her novel as much as you did. I only feel annoyed at "towards" without S. The two times Sophie wrote "backwards" without S were actual misophonia causes of pain. The first was while she was making up British customs at her drunk lunch.

Feel for me if you see those! Or "gently" where an act is already gentle; like meditating books or the gem one I am reading! Oh, that is revolting! Breathing and closing eyes are soft. What do they think we will do; crash out our breath and eyelids forcefully without that asinine specification?!!!! I'll be curious to know if you mind "The Ten Thousand Doors Of January" less, unless you are preturbed by the wasted adventure plot like I am and villains keeping up, like the worst cliché in any book. I know we are glad not to have each other's neurological problems! Thank you for feeling for me and I send you love, likewise.

I gave this novel two stars because it was no worse than the first one. It was better because Rebecca paid the debts, was doing well in the job she enjoyed, and had a good boyfriend. I could give no higher because she was as shallow, stupid, and out of control. Even though we hated this character and Sophie Kinsella's way of writing and many things defied credulity; one star is for the worst of the worse books. There was no animal, infant, or child lost or deceased, no abuse or assault. I leave the lowest grade for something disturbing and irredeemable, not a novel we thought was stupid. We need ten stars to grade properly.

It seems that we both can't help wanting to know if Rebecca shapes up. We like most of the characters besides her.

Rebecca had good instincts about Alicia being a person to dislike but she did not interfere with Luke's professional judgement. She had no proof, except that she should have told her boyfriend that an employee badmouthed her. As I said, Kate Carlisle's male character did not stand for that. It was obvious to me that Alicia sought client contacts from the receptionist and should have told Luke about that. Besides that, Luke trusted her and Rebecca trusted that he knew what he was getting from staff. No one could know she was chasing employees away, if all the reports came from Alicia and were made-up. I do not hold back on stupid characters but here & there, I don't think there was a problem with Rebecca. Honestly, I don't know why the receptionist didn't report to Luke sometimes and also volunteer to tell him, or ask for permission to give Alicia client details. She must have imagined that it was acceptable for someone high up, like Alicia, to have them. I think we can praise Rebecca for saving Luke's company.

I am in no rush to see if we are rewarded or groaning in a third book. In the preview I have, Rebecca is incapable of asking her Mom to refrain from inviting people to a wedding. However, a part of you wants to like her as I hope to, because you are willing to wade into the fray if you find volume 3 cheap. ;>

I don't know if one can redo a falsely filled out document. They might not care if there is a fee per application. Computers can keep track of applications and might have an application waiting period. However, you can get by non-govermental things by making a new start.

A window broke in our apartment, when we wrestled to open it one winter. We had insurance and things are supposed to be fixed for free anyway in apartments. That is the benefit of not owning the place. The caretaker reported it but worded it as if it was our fault, not that anything should have mattered and the building company deemed us ineligible for repairs. It was nonsense because they would fix it if a new tenant rented the place. I phoned a few days later to report a broken window. Out of curiousity, the call taker asked what happened. I said I found it already cracked. He said "Oh well" and it was repaired.

In my first apartment, I had a clunky fridge. It must have been hard to watch TV. I wouldn't have said anything unless it was quite intrusive. Perhaps I had a problem I am not presently remembering. The caretaker felt it ought to be replaced and told a story about throwing food out, to ensure it was done. People whose job it is to deliver repair requests, or applications through are keen to do it. You simply need to be careful not to present it in a way that office drones hesitate about it.

I will happily read "The Second Summer Of The Sisterhood" with you any time you are free to. My "coming soon" dates here at Gentle Spectrums are estimated.

There is one more thing you disliked that I disregarded. It is the author mistakenly believing she was funny by making an employee clueless that Rebecca & Luke should be alone. I would have liked that reunion left in emotional privacy but here, by annoyed with the author.

Nonetheless, Luke should have met Rebecca privately. Rebecca should have arranged a call or meeting with Luke and said: "Is there a chance we will work out? If not, I wanted to warn you I might take a job opportunity in New York". London most certainly had personal shoppers too. I read about them in "Thirteen Little Blue Envelopes" from a ten years later time period.

Another complaint I lay in the author's lap is the turn-around of Rebecca's low self-esteem deportment. She could not tell a gift-wrapping department, prior to touching any product or disturbing anyone at all, that she misheard the offer and leave. Learning and making improvements in the right direction, is different from putting on a provocative show on television. Even more so, telling everyone she was leaving after the one segment, no matter what the inconvenience to the program, is not something she would dare to do. A person does not suddenly have quick-thinking and assertive statements to lay down to objections or pressure.

I spent time searching for the joke you made and could not find "did he die while exploring, or was it unrelated? Were those your words, or did your book add a sentence? I wish it had been clear so I didn't search something that isn't there. I found the advertisement twice, only once with the word "deceased" but it ends at that. I wanted to laugh but it took long, not finding the remark I guess you added. I love subtle or frank humour.

I don't think most people know about convents, Kerri. Neither did I and I grew up with two Aunt level friends of Mom's, from whom I heard a few stories. I know the little I do because I finally asked one of them how it worked and why they left it. When the teaching order stopped, there was no purpose in it anymore, so they continued in education as civilians and rose high up the ranks, those serious but loveable Aunts.

In the chatty scene where Rebecca had trouble understanding she wasn't supposed to savour the quietude, the author tried to make a comedy out of her getting kicked out. It made me mad because here for once was a sincere scene. She wanted to learn about nuns and was genuinely asking about everything. The nun in her discipline, would not have felt frustrated with a girl wanting to learn about it. She would have found it sweet. It was one of my few breaks from disliking Rebecca, well before the end of the novel. She would not have urged her to a gift store. Like Maud Montgomery ruined a happy novel by deaths, Sophie Kinsella ruined some real personality to Rebecca. She didn't understand why the Victoria stained glass was thought gaudy by the other woman and was amazed by it anyway. I think the other woman was looking down her nose at less rare or old art, in a shallow way Rebecca usually did.

We could empty reams of frustration for the length that comment boxes offer. I'll angle my discussion from the point of view of criticising weak storywriting and behaviour that is not true to real life. Refusing to remove enough clothes to fit a suitcase was stupid. Not putting a change of clothes in your purse or small abg was worse nonsense. Refusing to buy a t-shirt and sweats from a hotel gift shop or nearest store is against what Rebecca would do. She kept making excuses for shopping where there were none. She would NOT suggest it would disrespect Suze, to buy clothes when she needs to.

The same goes for the ending. Yes, getting money off her her purchases was wise, especially items besides clothing. I acknowledge you thought it should occur to her straight away but seeing that she does have assets to turn into money was a positive step. She should not have sold too many clothes or the items that meant something to her, obviously. I like lovely moments but as a writer, disliked Sophie's cliche: of course Luke bid on the scarf. That looks like an error because if he knew about the sale, he knew about her move. He was hurt she didn't discuss it with him personally but Sophie wrote that he had not heard about it period and flew out of a meeting to the airport. Why wouldn't Rebecca want him to know it was she who helped? Readers knew it would help mend their relationship.

The purpose of the sale was preventing needless purchases and paying bills. Do not create the need for redoing a wardrobe. Here in the novel, where we are able to feel bad for Rebecca and hope for the best for this fictional idiot, the author fabcricates an excuse to rebuy basic slacks, shirts, and dresswear. If she wanted the message to be that her character wanted to live with less, it didn't work. All I wondered was how she thought it saved money to sell what she would need and already had on hand.

I was dismayed with her Mom, who it sounds like a drag in the third novel, which seems to be about bugging Rebecca to invite unneeded people to a wedding. Her parents know she has a spending problem but her Mom gave her catalogues and shipped her order bonuses to her address. Otherwise I love her parents, Luke, Suze, Tarquin, and think I am in love with Michael Ennis; besides a bald head not being attractive to me. She does love Luke and never took a penny from him for shopping. They click and enjoy each other in ways that Sophie does herself an injustice to keep offscreen. He wants to conquer business too single-mindedly, she is shallow and addicted but they know it about each other and take it with a grain of salt; are undaunted. Believe me, love isn't about finding someone who isn't annoying to you at all. It was Luke calling out her bullshit, his confidence, success at what he enjoys that was attractive to Rebecca. He just laughed at the lies he unearthed and made a game of it. She saw she could be herself with him, far more than she let herself do. Surprisingly, she learned a bit about the finance world too from having a small part in it.

Kerri, news reporters, hosts, and DJs read what they are given, sure. Meterologists have to know their stuff and many on-air personalities work all day before their TV or radio slot. I used to work in the industry. Some came only to do their on-air program, others had desks and preparation to do. People who accept calls or answer questions do have to know enough about it. Surprisingly, Rebecca qualified in that regard. She wasn't taking her advice, or didn't understand it in a real world sense. I feel like she should have read "Steps to deal with shopping addiction" and had a clear guide to follow. It would have wiped out the excuses she made; allowing a little shopping where it made sense. She needed a casual outfit on her countryside trip and she needed to keep a basic warddrobe outside her auction.

You are right that Rebecca should have firmly ended speculation with: "I have never been interested in Tom besides in friendship". If someone were stupidly disbelieving, bring in reinforcements. Tell your Mom "I found Tom unattractive but wouldn't say that". Mrs. Bloomwood will find a tactful way to convey it to Tom's parents. I don't think Jodie was a positive influence, except helping Rebecca find her an apartment. Tell her about the addiction so she isn't spending more than the monthly discount at her job.

I want to get the auction off my chest. Earning a bit of money is SOMETHING. I plan to do it with books, since even a few dollars at a time, the quantity we have will yield decent money for us. I will monetize what I used to give away or trade at a loss at used shops. I don't want to turn off customers, knowing none of us think $10.00+ for used books is reasonable. I wouldn't pay more than $10.00 CDN for used clothes either. It is a fantasy of this author that her character, no matter who Tarquin knows, is getting a Christie's auction to draw buyers! She is fortunate to earn enough to pay debts I don't want to guess about.

I don't mean to sound uncaring. I donated plenty in the past. I don't think this character is someone who should donate "extras" to charity. Build up your life with it: have savings, food, rent, transportation fare, good coverage for an emergency or unexpected need. How does she have extras, even in an overblown yard sale? I doubt overseas plane fair was better than it is now. It was ironic that Rebecca's most useless spending item, besides the letters "Paul", was the bowl and that her bank creditor bought it.

I think I said "I refuse to put myself through a terrible character and writing again, even though I have the books" and expected the same conclusion from you. I felt like killing Rebecca's stupidity and the author's nonsense at the same places you did. The author tries to addict *us* by making her look likeable and scrounging up hope at the end. I am not falling for it and am putting the rest at a low priority. You said the rest improve. I feel it would be nice to see Luke & Rebecca marry. However, my suspicion was thinking the character and writing would improve but feeling angry until the last couple of chapters. How about writing a book we don't hate, Sophie?

You live on a side of the world closer to Europe than we do. I vaguely heard of "Faulty Towers" because they are I guess, a "Monty Python" extension but two films were all I could take of their over-the-top, outmoded humour. I very vaguely clued into the "Don't talk about the war" sctick but have never heard of the other show you referred to. Sometimes where you live makes a difference.

It is why I find the Graham Norton show abosutely thrilling; even in music, which you would think would be across the globe. I look forward to discussing when you answer e-mail letters, how excited I was to see Graham Norton be interviewed by Seth Meyers (whom I adore and find attractive) and Drew Barrymore!

Our internet is turning on & off so I will send this and go about my day. I am catching-up on parcels to have some ready for Ron to drop off tomorrow. Thank you for seeing many of my reviews. For more low star laughs, see: "Rip Van Winkle", "The Legend Of Sleepy Hollow", and my duology of those that reviewed "Golden Dreams".

A lot of topics occur to us, which we roll out as we have time to write them. I want to add Suze was not a pushover. She agreed to help her friend try to resolve her addiction but being a drill sergeant is not the way, nor a role anyone wants. Talk reason: the concerns, unpleasant outcomes, the solution to the problem are great. Disappointed reactions or prohibiting someone who hasn't faced the problem and solution clearly, makes them hide.

Mornings weren't my thing. I would have had better school and university grades with afternoon classes and decent bus service. I dated a bossy person at one time and I wouldn't have minded a helpful word such as "Please don't skip out so much that you can't catch-up, or feel uncomfortable reappearing in classes".

If I prioritized sleep one day, or decided a certain class wasn't worth a bus ride and that doing the assignments were enough; it was my choice. Instead of a caring talk, this boyfriend acted like a policeman; checking at the end of my classes and demanding to know where I was. If that is how you wanted Suze to be, think again. I told him I felt hunted, including when it was acceptable for me to decide that some lectures were of no more benefit than reading a specific textbook chapter. He hated being called a policeman, got the message, and butted out.

I don't feel the way you do about immunity. I understand why, which of course is private. I have never worried about lungs, sinuses, or health. I have felt confident about getting through any illness or flu. I grew up in public, handling the Earth outside, sharing make-up, and beverages. I think it did me good: with Mom drilling into us handwashing and cleanliness with kitchens and play. She made me aware that purses are dirty, therefore mine sits on a floor like shoes do. I wipe my purse when I think of it.

When you wrote about changing clothes after visting hospitals, I thought it was a good idea. I certainly washed my hands leaving and prior to having food; out or at home. However, I drew the line at a mask. I followed rules during the covid19 hysteria but I am not wearing a mask in public places, as if the hysteria were still going. Of course, we have Donna Eden to thank for showing us how to keep our immunity thumping now. :)

Avoid anyone with an irritated eye or a cold. However, I think sharing makeup is fine and rinse the applicator or use a different one, if possible. I balk at discarding makeup as early as experts say we should. I know the material deteriorates eventually and felt that effect (keeping childhood makeup past my 20s). However, we can safely use it much longer than people claim. Consumers can't afford to replace what they have perfectly well on hand, thank you very much. Thanks to Mom, I did not have to buy lipstick or lipgloss. She gave me colours she changed her mind about.

I hate this character. How much you vent and hate Rebecca is a relief. Thank you for the laughter your ranting and identical reactions bring, Kerri. This author has concocted too much to disbelieve.

I ignore the flitting present-tense and "towards" without S. However, assholes who omit the S there don't do it for "backwards" either and a few minutes ago, this fucking bitch used that word in the American way!!!! She is also spelling "colour" with U!!!! Gosh, the one thing I should count on from a British writer is freedom from a couple of misophonia struggles! I hate it if people allow another country to influence how they do things. Be yourself. If a fellow Canadian dares to say "happy holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas", it takes force for me not to yell: "What is wrong with you! Stop using a meaningless expression"!

One gratifying thing about the Manhattan trip is Rebecca is trying to call bags "purses" like we North Americans do. It feels weird to hear "post" as a noun or verb, besides what we do on the internet here. We say "mail a piece of MAIL". Also, a "post" is a pole, usually part of a fence. A break from British jargon is nice. I do want to explode from her vacuous way of going "Erm". Answer a question like an adult! Stop looking for a lie to make-up!

Oh, what made me most mad, was Rebecca thinking interviews are for "sounding like what a company is looking for". What a loser. You do your best to SHOW you are the right hire if it is true. Interview skills mean being adept at conveying yourself confidently, frankly, courteously, and intelligently. If a job is not a fit, this is also the purpose of the meeting for both sides. I did not get nervous at interviews because I know I am easy to like, I speak well, am polite, and didn't mind seeing a job is not for me. If it was a good fit, I would get it. If I didn't, I wouldn't care; no need to be nervous.

Sophie Kinsella is making Rebecca weak in every regard, Kerri and I can't hack it. I am where you are, almost in chapter 10 at page 182. I feel the way we did last year: if the hated book plots don't shape up at the end of this novel, I don't dare read anymore: even though I just about have them all, in first edition. They were low-priced and gathered over years, otherwise I wouldn't buy them, as you know. I look at prices and refrain if they are high, or if an item is not wanted strongly. At her interview, she had wine because that's what she though people did in the USA. When Sophie's description read "I had more because a waiter continued filling the glass", I hated how weak she was! Say "No thank you, no more for me". She is written as a shopaholic but she is a liar, as well as not refusing wine in front of her.

I don't think the women at sample sales were like her, unless events were frequent. Wise women would decline. It sounds like a low key savings opportunity but stick to what you need. Find out what is in the giveaway bags. Spending $50.00 US for them is not worth it if you don't like what is in the bags and if the sale doesn't have items you need. You know how to use your earnings productively and skillfully. "Do the math" is not a common phrase from me, ha ha. It is nevertheless easy to see if a sale yields what you want, at a veritable bargain.

Booksales are savings and I obtain books or CDs I sought. However, I skipped the last one. Our house has no room for an influx of books. Ron is holding back frustration. I am keeping my parents' belongings at this time. To make space for it, I am cleaning out items I do not need, like papers. I packaged books for my Niece & Nephew and cards and photographs Mom had, that belong to Timmy.

I made a postal box of used books to send Leeanne. They aren't designed to fit many but every inch of space reclaimed is good, as well as bringing joy to my recipients. Oh, how I hope an international option for bulk mail is created! Your box would brim with literature you would like. I'm tired of those piddly 5x7 orange envelope carrying two or three at a time. I'll look for a wider envelope today. Selling books is the most space saving action and a fruitful way to earn money too. The library needs to be clean before people shop. I might try advertising books on-line to pick-up. However, it would feel disappointing to receive sales replies, instead of to Conan's search alert with that website account.

Cleaning receipts and recycling gifts is a good start. When Ron dropped off several framed photographs and a few gifts for Mark & Jennifer for Christmas; I protected the glass with used bubble envelopes. Fewer bubble envelopes clears space and is how I should mail things to you more often. They might fit four or more books and CDs for about the same postage as a 5x7 envelope.

I think it was wrong of the Bloomswoods to tell neighbours Rebecca lied out of stress for being in debt. Making up a stalker was terrible but say "It turned out that Rebecca was mistaken, fortunately" and say no more. Surely, she had her whole childhood to flatly and firmly conclude: "I was never interested in your Son"!

Besides lying, I most disapprove of her shallowness. YOU HAVE SPENT ENOUGH MONEY. You can't be amazed at a tour or New York City landmarks and a major museum? You drove Luke's car just in a parking lot, hoping people would admire you for the prestige of the model? Besides clothes, trinkets, and sex; what does Rebecca naturally find fun? Look, I am not a gym machinery person either. I believe in plain outdoor exercise, or dancing at home to music. But when I went to a gym in university, there was no shame in being new to every station and asking people how to use them safely and properly. It is fun to be new at things and people enjoy helping us discover them.

Nuns do not sing all day. They work, it is a chosen profession. They have duties, jobs, and a goal. Convents are made out of "orders", such as a "nursing order", where they are actually professional nurses. Two women who loved me since I was a baby and whom I called Aunts, used to be nuns. They rose up the ranks of a "teaching order". It is a career path, except religion runs it and you must be dedicated to catholism. More people have learned about "women's health convent orders", from the television program "Call The Midwife".

The only time I liked Rebecca was when she was helping people, like you said. I liked her doing the same with Tarquin, who did not know how to dress or style his hair. Except she might have asked him to buy the sweater if he liked it (North Americans do not have the word "jumper" and take time to figure out what Brits mean by that). He could afford it, she was going to get a refund for it.

I considered if my packing list sounded too long but if possible; jeans, loose slacks, and two pairs of shorts are handy if you're away for a week. If there is a reason to dress up, dress pants and a dress or skirt and blouse are good too and they can be rolled small. If there is no formality, stick to the shorts, sweats or light slacks, and jeans. Thanks to my Mom, I need not buy clothing for years. Loosening space to store it is what I need to do. Look, I get buying a new suit or dress slacks for a television job. Rebecca's spending was disgusting, for being mindless and irresponsible.

I thought Rebecca had three weeks to prepare. Even that is too little to plan a vacation, let alone the occasion to be overseas. If you came, where we have discussed you would need something like six months to see much; we would prepare for a year or two, wouldn't we? Likewise for a couple of months in New Zealand.

How did Rebecca get her mailed clothes (stupid not to pack necessities in her purse!) and convent purchases home in Luke's car? It is weird to call a "trunk" a boot.

I noticed your posts before Ron called me for our vegetarian week-end breakfast. I read the first one, then laughed with him about how good it made me feel to see YOU rant for a change. I explained that these two books suck on too many levels and that the author left no room to like the character. I said Rebecca has wonderful parents and an admirable boyfriend who knows she lies and call her out on it lovingly. I said it angers us that she lies even to them! I said what brings my stress down from these annoying, reckless stories is you laughing about them with me. Thank you for this, Kerri. It truly makes my day to call trash for what it is, together with you. This author is wrong if she thought we would find any ounce of it humourous or cute. I didn't see the joke at the end of the book advertisement and will look at it.

One more rant from me. If she didn't want Suze to see that she was looking at an office supplies website (which I suppose will be delivered while she is considering moving out of the country), she need only close the website. No one rushes through a purchase! I imagine most people do this: you put things into your virtual cart that you are considering, then move them to a wish list or delete them. You only want an item or two and are merely comparing options or prices. Don't we all generally look on-line this way? To buy your whole virtual shopping cart instead of turning off the webpage or internet, is stupid beyond even my credulity in these outrageously unrealistic novels!

I think Rebecca will find she can't leave the UK or enter the USA with debt. I still found room after tolerating this ridiculous author twice, to be shocked that her character lied on an immigration form. Don't be fucking stupid. State your reasons for wanting to emigrate and be assessed properly; you cowardly, outrageous bitch!

I feel for addicts. I have noticed that they can fall prey to other ones. Ron quit smoking. I would not be with a smoker and he was disliked a habit he deemed unhealthy. It worked out well for our new relationship that he gladly freed himself. I can't respect anyone who smokes. The dangers have been advertised since the 1980s and are on the packages nowadays, with frightening pictures. I am proud of Dad for quitting, who brought no smoke into our family house.

I am relieved I am not addictive. I watch for things to not overdo, like chocoate or chips. Bags of junk food chemical chips are what the British call "crisps" oddly. "French fries" are what we call narrow potato strips. I watched my behaviour with my new smart phone and am relieved I have no inclination to keep my nose in it. When Protonmail opens on our PC, I don't turn on my cell phone. My parents aren't here anymore and hardly anyone knows the telephone number. It is an emergency asset. If the USB cord works well, I will be glad to transfer data with somewhat faster internet. That is all. I turn it on after a few days to verify its battery is charged. I hate typing or looking at the internet on it. I am simply grateful for the relief of the telephone and internet option at home and when we are out.

Yes, cell phones off at weddings and personal visits are rules I heed, Kerri! The cell phone should have been back on after, for news from Luke. This author's gimmicks are annoying and predictable..... except when her scenes are worse than expected! Phew, this venting out of last night's annoying reading has felt good!

Alicia wanting contacts means she wants to open a company and is placating Luke until she leaves. Rebecca should report her rudeness. Kate Carlisle's protagonist has a boyfriend with his own company. When Derek found out two girls remarked about their relationship and upset Brooke, he fired them. Luke is loyal too.

My friend Kerri, God bless you for cherishing how much I savour my closeness to my beloved parents. Thank you for echoing my loving feelings about them back to me.

Page 32 is the beginning of chapter 3, where I am. "Dumb" and "low self-esteem" are the word for her, not "airheaded". Everything I hated about Rebecca is disappointingly the same. I am not saying I expect a different outlook, attitude, and discipline about money on the first try. She sucks in ALL the other ways too, that you & I were aghast about before.

Nighttime is for reading. Morning is when I type. However, I am finishing book reviews, to mail a batch to my family for Christmas and birthdays. I am also clearing up Timmy's copies of family keepsakes like photographs and papers and greeting cards that belong to him.

I see that you posted, so I'll reply straight away, while there are only 32 pages to express anger about. The author is making her character a fuck-up in too many ways again. She is so stupid but also spineless and isn't she in her 30s?

Our frame of mind affects the ideal time to read certain things. I just shoved myself through a compounded misophonia triggering novel that was overly descriptive, slow, and not as exciting as it should have been. You know from e-mail this evening, if you did not see my reply at my review of "The Ten-Thousand Doors Of January" yesterday, that nothing compares to that agonizing experience. Therefore, this trivial novel is a walk in the park: light, like you said. Booing it together is fun! I was NOT catty in school so it is fun to be bluntly critical and hold back nothing.

One thing you did not remark upon is its present-tense narration, that most people hate. Did Sophie Kinsella use it in the first novel? My review doesn't complain about it. This is a rare occasion when something about it works, which might be why it went unnoticed for you. There is no getting used to it, as you suggested about the other novel you are reading. It is always unpalatable. It is simply that you like what you're reading enough to glaze over it. I just peeked at the hardcover I reviewed an hour ago and couldn't stand one sentence of that ugly sentence structure. But I am having no problem reading Sophie Kinsella's novel and I think it is because it is dialogue heavy. Dialogue is in present-tense, so the small amount around it goes down easily.

Look, if there were an election of a procrastinating queen, Ron would nominate me and I might win it. When there is a lot of work to do, I push myself to start. However, when I am ready and when it is important, I go to work seriously. That is part of why I prepare my stamina for long tasks. If I had a book deal, I would dig in. It is why I am home-based and is my dream come true! It is not Rebecca's but she was offered that rare opportunity and a pay advance. GET WRITING.

If Sophie is as predictable and dreadful as she was in her first story, I see Rebecca fucking up her book contract and television appearance slot. Instead of spending what she used to on her memo writing salary and having ample funding to pay it all off; she is spending more. I think Sophie is bold enough to have her protagonist lose those jobs, after charging worse sums.

I predict Rebecca is invited to Manhattan to visit Luke's Mom. She will make the excuse about souvenirs of New York City and buy more than she did at home. If I understand one thing, it is "once in a lifetime trips". I bought a jacket in Montreal both times I went. I needed them and it was nice to get affordable jackets in our fashion capital. I wore the first for 20 years. I might still have it, a pretty purple spring jacket. I have had the second one for twenty years: a long faux-leather jacket, suitable and stylish for formal wear in winter. I buy postcards that I send and keep. I buy a special ornament if I can, which I cherish. I value my photographs above all.

What would I do if I had a TV job? I would choose from the ample blouses, skirts, and suits I already have. I might buy one or two new pairs of slacks and blouses if it is was regular job. I have more shoes than I have the time or place to wear and I am not a shoe nut like many women. I have had a million retail and front desk jobs where dressing-up was a must; including executive, media, and government industries. I drew my wardrobe from what I had. I have been to the Juno Awards, for Pete's sakes! Canada's Grammys! What did I wear? The beautiful ball gown I had bought for a wedding. It looks like what anyone would wear on a red carpet and it serves me well, in many size periods. My ball gown is like the adaptable, dependable "Sisterhood Pants"! :)

I *have* bought duplicate shoes and slippers in all their colours. It is because they were comfortable, good quality, not necessarily found at that fortunate sale price again, and they will be worn for years. Price stops me from buying something easily, as do our funds. If I don't need it and if it isn't just about free, I don't buy it. When you see the book stock around our house, you will be amazed at how often we did find books that were just about free but was paid the same month, if it was ever charged at all.

Rebecca lying and not feeling confident about telling a cashier "no", or she changed her mind, or does not want to give details is the second most aspect of these novels that annoys me, Kerri. If you want to spend a few more dollars to earn a candle or whatnot, ask the cashier to wait while you browse for something you want. You don't scrape together letters you won't use! The last thing a person does who wants to clear away debt, is buy something useless. That is as unrealistic as her inability to speak the fuck up and not lie about her purchases. Gosh, if we were at least over that, I would enjoy this series far more. I don't expect you to buy the third one. I might only continue because I have the whole set - cheap of course.

The number one trope of Sophie's that angers me, is the pathetic and shallow-minded idea that this stupid character can't remove t-shirts and pants from a suitcase! Luggage is a good investment but needn't be designer, as you remarked aptly. You can travel, you can move clothes with it. Come to think of it, I might store extra towels and blankets in the library building in my Parents' luggage, to avoid the mice there. That is a good space saver! However, if you have never gone to a cottage or friend's house for the week-end or travelled, learn what you need. It is a list you will print in the future.

I add briefs and socks for every day plus a spare of each. One brassiere will do, unless you need a strapless one for formal wear or spaghetti strap casual wear. One nightgown or pyjamas is fine. I would add a robe if I need to walk past people to the washroom, otherwise I'll bathe and dress prior to seeing anyone. One swimming suit and beach throw if applicable. One jeans, runners, and casual slacks. One t-shirt, casual shirt, and blouse. If summery, add one or two pairs of shorts, a muscle shirt, sandals. One skirt or dress and nice shoes if needed. I have a pre-packed toiletries case of tiny shampoo, conditioner, toothpaste, tooth brush, skin cream, powder, painkillers in case there was none. Cameras, batteries, cords, glasses, make-up bag, cell phone, charger, two plastic bags to protect items or put laundry in, a few paperbacks, slim photo prints of my kitties, and purse. That is it.

This fits in a carry bag, with a front pocket for quick access or small things, or something like paperbacks that I won't risk being reached by spilled shampoo or cream. Make-up bag, camera, glasses, cell phone, and a paperback go in my purse. If we don't need to bring towels, beach mats, coolers (our version of picnic hampers), lawnchairs, or sheets; it is even easier. However these items can be light and compact too.

A printed list of essentials to checkmark, ensures you don't forget anything; going and returning home. I appreciate that Ron packs different shoes, hiking equipment, and clothing for all weather but my bag is lighter and smaller than his. Obviously, I could bring fewer shirt and shorts selections depending on the trip duration, season, and if there are dressy outings.

Rebecca not so much as trying to reduce shirts and slacks and thinking it is in any way difficult, makes me hate her. That was before the shallowest bitch I have ever heard of, ordered a courier to Luke's cottage. He made a point of asking her to respect his trunk size. (Ha ha, how did that sound?) Is she going to go hiking for a cottage courier to mail half of her luggage back?

I think I have made due with my carry bag for as much as a week's visit. I had an extra bag when I was with Dad this April because I had CDs, photographs, and books to share with him among my small amount of clothes. Oh, I wish I could keep saying I was with my beloved Parents this year, this season, this month, this week, and this day! I will enjoy the proximity to his physical life with me while it is near for me to savour it!

You aren't done any of the six that were there before. I was hoping you didn't need to exempt this one from being number seven! When you are off Goodreads for a spell, I think you must be reading up a storm with the internet not cutting in.

January is a good month for ridding anything that doesn't work. Let's see how "Manhattan" fares. There are better books to bolster our days with thereafter! Listing seven books is nuts. Stop adding until you finish them.

Kerri, Shirin, & I highly anticipate every story in this series. We became fans instantly and discuss our feelings and ideas broadly at this group. I can't wait to see the answers to numerous questions!

There is one more short story and I hope it contains Richard, Blue, and everyone we love. I don't expect anyone familiar except Ronan in the next series. I am going to enjoy my fill of and savour the wonderful, endearing Richard!

Happy new year! Here is a sequel Kerri & I will give a chance to improve the series this new year, 2025!

Anyone who finished the first series novel, is welcome to read along with us. Let's fine-tune the month we will return to a protagonist to whom we have fortunately begun to warm up. Sincerely, your hostesss, Carolyn.

Happy new year! Here is the sequel Kerri & I look forward to reading soon in this new year, 2025!

Anyone who finished the first series novel, is welcome to read along with us. Let's fine-tune the month and week we are keen to return to our favourite best friend quartet.

Sincerely, your hostesss, Carolyn.

Kerri, wasn't your Mom a working single parent? I wondered how she organized her schedule, or what you did until she was back. Many posts ago, I asked you and Leeanne for firsthand experience and she gave hers.

Did Jermaine and LaToya publish their autobiographies after Michael's transition? I would read them.

Kerri, do you generally pick up clues and recall details? During Anne & Gilbert's wedding, I wondered if readers should assume there were photographs, dancing, a banquet supper, throwing a bouquet. Maud skipped a lot. There were certainly important photos and formal portraits in the early 1900s at LEAST.

However, I wondered seriously after Owen "snapped a picture of Captain Jim", with his own camera. Don't you remember that? It made me mad that she had not discussed wedding photographs too.

Oh, I am happy you were interested in my baby count historical parade! Yes, I am grateful our families told us about all their children, including babies mourned by both Great-Grandparents. Thereafter, I am glad I stay focused and remember qhat they told us.

Leeanne, have you seen my engagement or moving stories, in e-mail or discussions before? If this is new to you, I look forward to your feedback. Kerri knows that background.

The other personal aspect I put a lot of sensitive care into writing and organizing here, is the family histories. I would appreciate comments on that from both of you, pretty please.

Discussing the children from my Great-Grandparents to Ron and me, was to confirm Maud never needed Susan in any story. However, being a personal addition and a large writing effort to boot, I'd like a nod to them please.

Kerri, you missed a few posts back, that reviewer Gundula said Susan is prominent in the next book!

You know I am a series finisher and Leeanne likely knows that too. I say I am not buying the last novel, even if it cost a quarter, because it is too horrible to read. Who could stand a novel about children trying to keep their Parents from cooking animals? Who would want to, series or not?

Do we expect the outcome in the 1920s, in a farm community, to give us relief with "Okay Darlings, we won't". My guess is the conclusion is a fucked up justification for killing and eating living beings, which I survive very well without, a cruelty free lifestyle a farmer's Son mainly shares along with me. There's finishing a series and there is knowingly reading shit you would hate, which I am wise enough not to do.

It is interesting to wonder why Maud minimized Anne's & Gilbert's parts later. I disagree with Kerri that they were minimized now. This entire novel is about Anne as much as ever and about Gilbert, more than ever before in any novel. I would say he appeared as much in the previous, epistolary novel as he did in person in the other novels; which was little.

Kerri, I hope you jump in on the wedding photography question. I also wanted both your views several posts back, on how single parents handled children after school, who certainly had to work and whose hours were probably longer than school. Leeanne, I value what you shared about that. I had a Mom who stayed home while Dad worked, so your perspectives were ideal to my previous long contribution. I'd have to read back to remember how it came out of this novel, ha ha! It pertained to maternity leave.

I suggest again that we leave out what we heard about the authoress in reality. Leeanne, you a few times said your Mom thought Maud disliked Anne but after reading her autobiography with you, I observed nothing of the kind. It makes no sense: you don't dislike a character you created. You create what you WANT to see, or a reflection of yourself WITH SYMPATHY, that you want to work out.

In any case, let's leave her world out and focus on her purpose with the stories themselves. Why would she retire her principal character, related to by everyone? How did she see her books and what was as the public's viewpoint? Am I thinking of a different author, or did Maud not write "Anne Of Green Gables" as a children's stories but it got popularly presented that way?

One explanation for putting Anne Shirley in the background is if she did think they were children's stories, or come to call them that after they were appreciated like that. Might she think children only wanted to read of young protagonists? Was she so unimaginative as to overlook that children grew up with the series and would enjoy seeing Anne become a woman? The span of years was ample, wasn't it, for a teenager to match Anne at age 28? I am thrilled to watch Anne as a Mom.

I don't want the perspective to go directly to her children, as Gundula wrote that it did. Less patient reviewers (believe me, Gundula is a big one for telling it like it is) said that the kids were annoyingly pious or perfect and unenjoyable to follow.

Enjoying some of Anne's adventures does not mean they won't dim or flatten by being repeated on extraneous characters. I deem it a gross cliché to presume everyone likes "trouble". I never liked it when there were mishaps. I preferred when Anne took charge of successful adventures that she would not get in trouble for. Indeed, I prefer older ages when no one would give trouble about anything anymore. I like child protagonists and heroes but adults, teachers, authority figures must be left out so the adventures and activities are undisturbed.

That's it from me. The more we write, the harder it can be to catch everything. I'm just popping in to encourage you to discuss some things I look forward to and don't want overlooked.

We already discussed that the "Emily New Moon" stories looked abusive and I won't tolerate that. I have individual books to enjoy: "Along The Shore", "Among The Shadows", "The Blue Castle". I don't need a more detailed autobiography, especially if it was written by an outsider. What good would that be but the inaccurate heresay we aim to avoid? If Maud wrote more about herself, I would be glad to read that.

Leeanne, I wrote a letter to Kerri this morning about being emotionally moved by Michael Jackson's last documentary "This Is It". It is his personal concert building footage, which is all we have, because he died a week before débuting in London. I didn't dare attend a concert in a foreign country (and tickets were sold out in an hour) but thought it was neat that I was going to be there at the same time as him!

The way this applies to what we are saying, is that last year, I brought home a hardcover about Michael's last years or days. It was in my parents' apartment building's free library room. I read the back and the fourth-hand gossip style turned me off. When I stayed with Dad this April, I put it back into his massive apartment building's library room. I am not going to read a compilation of headlines about anyone. I will only read about Michael from his family. Their family members are numerous. There is no excuse to be so shallow or disrespectful as to accept hersay from an outsider.

A Jackson likely wrote about Michael in a book I didn't notice. I don't know when Goodreads opened. I became a member in 2012. A book about Maud could only be guessing or making too much of speculation from outdated news articles, unless family or a friend wrote it long ago.

Leeanne, have you seen my engagement or moving stories, in e-mail or discussions before? If this is new to you, I look forward to your feedback. Kerri knows those histories of mine. The other personal aspect I put a lot of sensitive care into writing and organizing here, is the family histories. I would appreciate comments on that from both of you, pretty please.

Discussing the children from my Great-Grandparents to Ron and me, was to confirm Maud never needed Susan in any story. However, being a personal addition and a large writing effort to boot, I'd like a nod to them please.

Kerri, you missed a few posts back, that reviewer Gundula said Susan is prominent in the next book!

You know I am a series finisher and Leeanne likely knows that too. So when I say I am not buying the last novel, even if it is only a quarter, it is because it is too horrible to read. Who could stand a novel about children trying to keep their Parents from cooking animals? Who would want to, series or not?

Do we expect the outcome in the 1920s, in a farm community, to give us relief with "Okay Darlings, we won't". My guess is the conclusion is a fucked up justification for killing and eating living beings, which I survive very well without, a cruelty free lifestyle a farmer's Son mainly shares along with me. There's finishing a series and there is knowingly reading shit you would hate, which I am wise enough not to do.

It is interesting to wonder why Maud minimized Anne's & Gilbert's parts later. I disagree with Kerri that they were minimized now. This entire novel is about Anne as much as ever and about Gilbert, more than ever before in any novel. I would say he appeared as much in the previous, epistolary novel as he did in person in the other novels; which was little.

Kerri, I hope you jump in on the wedding photography question. I also wanted both your views several posts back, on how single parents handled children after school, who certainly had to work and whose hours were probably longer than school. Leeanne, I value what you shared about that. I had a Mom who stayed home while Dad worked, so your perspectives were ideal to my previous long contribution. I'd have to read back to remember how it came out of this novel, ha ha! It pertained to maternity leave.

I suggest again that we leave out what we heard about the authoress in reality. Leeanne, you a few times said your Mom thought Maud disliked Anne but after reading her autobiography with you, I observed nothing of the kind. It makes no sense: you don't dislike a character you created. You create what you WANT to see, or a reflection of yourself WITH SYMPATHY, that you want to work out.

In any case, let's leave her world out and focus on her purpose with the stories themselves. Why would she retire her principal character, related to by everyone? How did she see her books and what was as the public's viewpoint? Am I thinking of a different author, or did Maud not write "Anne Of Green Gables" as a children's stories but it got popularly presented that way?

One explanation for putting Anne Shirley in the background is if she did think they were children's stories, or come to call them that after they were appreciated like that. Might she think children only wanted to read of young protagonists? Was she so unimaginative as to overlook that children grew up with the series and would enjoy seeing Anne become a woman? The span of years was ample, wasn't it, for a teenager to match Anne at age 28? I am thrilled to watch Anne as a Mom.

I don't want the perspective to go directly to her children, as Gundula wrote that it did. Less patient reviewers (believe me, Gundula is a big one for telling it like it is) said that the kids were annoyingly pious or perfect and unenjoyable to follow.

Enjoying some of Anne's adventures does not mean they won't dim or flatten by being repeated on extraneous characters. I deem it a gross cliché to presume everyone likes "trouble". I never liked it when there were mishaps. I preferred when Anne took charge of successful adventures that she would not get in trouble for. Indeed, I prefer older ages when no one would give trouble about anything anymore. I like child protagonists and heroes but adults, teachers, authority figures must be left out so the adventures and activities are undisturbed.

That's it from me. The more we write, the harder it can be to catch everything. I'm just popping in to encourage you to discuss some things I look forward to and don't want overlooked.

We already discussed that the "Emily New Moon" stories looked abusive and I won't tolerate that. I have individual books to enjoy: "Along The Shore", "Among The Shadows", "The Blue Castle". I don't need a more detailed autobiography, especially if it was written by an outsider. What good would that be but the inaccurate heresay we aim to avoid? If Maud wrote more about herself, I would be glad to read that.

Leeanne, I wrote a letter to Kerri this morning about being emotionally moved by Michael Jackson's last documentary "This Is It". It is his personal concert building footage, which is all we have, because he died a week before débuting in London. I didn't dare attend a concert in a foreign country (and tickets were sold out in an hour) but thought it was neat that I was going to be there at the same time as him!

The way this applies to what we are saying, is that last year, I brought home a hardcover about Michael's last years or days. It was in my parents' apartment building's free library room. I read the back and the fourth-hand gossip style turned me off. When I stayed with Dad this April, I put it back into his massive apartment building's library room. I am not going to read a compilation of headlines about anyone. I will only read about Michael from his family. Their family members are numerous. There is no excuse to be so shallow or disrespectful as to accept hersay from an outsider.

A Jackson likely wrote about Michael in a book I didn't notice. I don't know when Goodreads opened. I became a member in 2012. A book about Maud could only be guessing or making too much of speculation from outdated news articles, unless family or a friend wrote it long ago.

Leeanne, have you seen my engagement or moving stories, in e-mail or discussions before? If this is new to you, I look forward to your feedback. Kerri knows those histories of mine. The other personal aspect I put a lot of sensitive care into writing and organizing here, is the family histories. I would appreciate comments on that from both of you, pretty please.

Discussing the children from my Great-Grandparents to Ron and me, was to confirm Maud never needed Susan in any story. However, being a personal addition and a large writing effort to boot, I'd like a nod to them please.

Kerri, you missed a few posts back, that reviewer Gundula said Susan is prominent in the next book!

You know I am a series finisher and Leeanne likely knows that too. So when I say I am not buying the last novel, even if it is only a quarter, it is because it is too horrible to read. Who could stand a novel about children trying to keep their Parents from cooking animals? Who would want to, series or not?

Do we expect the outcome in the 1920s, in a farm community, to give us relief with "Okay Darlings, we won't". My guess is the conclusion is a fucked up justification for killing and eating living beings, which I survive very well without, a cruelty free lifestyle a farmer's Son mainly shares along with me. There's finishing a series and there is knowingly reading shit you would hate, which I am wise enough not to do.

It is interesting to wonder why Maud minimized Anne's & Gilbert's parts later. I disagree with Kerri that they were minimized now. This entire novel is about Anne as much as ever and about Gilbert, more than ever before in any novel. I would say he appeared as much in the previous, epistolary novel as he did in person in the other novels; which was little.

Kerri, I hope you jump in on the wedding photography question. I also wanted both your views several posts back, on how single parents handled children after school, who certainly had to work and whose hours were probably longer than school. Leeanne, I value what you shared about that. I had a Mom who stayed home while Dad worked, so your perspectives were ideal to my previous long contribution. I'd have to read back to remember how it came out of this novel, ha ha! It pertained to maternity leave.

I suggest again that we leave out what we heard about the authoress in reality. Leeanne, you a few times said your Mom thought Maud disliked Anne but after reading her autobiography with you, I observed nothing of the kind. It makes no sense: you don't dislike a character you created. You create what you WANT to see, or a reflection of yourself WITH SYMPATHY, that you want to work out.

In any case, let's leave her world out and focus on her purpose with the stories themselves. Why would she retire her principal character, related to by everyone? How did she see her books and what was as the public's viewpoint? Am I thinking of a different author, or did Maud not write "Anne Of Green Gables" as a children's stories but it got popularly presented that way?

One explanation for putting Anne Shirley in the background is if she did think they were children's stories, or come to call them that after they were appreciated like that. Might she think children only wanted to read of young protagonists? Was she so unimaginative as to overlook that children grew up with the series and would enjoy seeing Anne become a woman? The span of years was ample, wasn't it, for a teenager to match Anne at age 28? I am thrilled to watch Anne as a Mom.

I don't want the perspective to go directly to her children, as Gundula wrote that it did. Less patient reviewers (believe me, Gundula is a big one for telling it like it is) said that the kids were annoyingly pious or perfect and unenjoyable to follow.

Enjoying some of Anne's adventures does not mean they won't dim or flatten by being repeated on extraneous characters. I deem it a gross cliché to presume everyone likes "trouble". I never liked it when there were mishaps. I preferred when Anne took charge of successful adventures that she would not get in trouble for. Indeed, I prefer older ages when no one would give trouble about anything anymore. I like child protagonists and heroes but adults, teachers, authority figures must be left out so the adventures and activities are undisturbed.

That's it from me. The more we write, the harder it can be to catch everything. I'm just popping in to encourage you to discuss some things I look forward to and don't want overlooked.

We already discussed that the "Emily New Moon" stories looked abusive and I won't tolerate that. I have individual books to enjoy: "Along The Shore", "Among The Shadows", "The Blue Castle". I don't need a more detailed autobiography, especially if it was written by an outsider. What good would that be but the inaccurate heresay we aim to avoid? If Maud wrote more about herself, I would be glad to read that.

Leeanne, I wrote a letter to Kerri this morning about being emotionally moved by Michael Jackson's last documentary "This Is It". It is his personal concert building footage, which is all we have, because he died a week before débuting in London. I didn't dare attend a concert in a foreign country (and tickets were sold out in an hour) but thought it was neat that I was going to be there at the same time as him!

The way this applies to what we are saying, is that last year, I brought home a hardcover about Michael's last years or days. It was in my parents' apartment building's free library room. I read the back and the fourth-hand gossip style turned me off. When I stayed with Dad this April, I put it back into his massive apartment building's library room. I am not going to read a compilation of headlines about anyone. I will only read about Michael from his family. Their family members are numerous. There is no excuse to be so shallow or disrespectful as to accept hersay from an outsider.

A Jackson likely wrote about Michael in a book I didn't notice. I don't know when Goodreads opened. I became a member in 2012. A book about Maud could only be guessing or making too much of speculation from outdated news articles, unless family or a friend wrote it long ago.

Home safety is important to us. We live in a forest. After the priority to human and animal life: we value family mementoes. My parents are recently gone to Heaven and I am comforted by their belongings for me to hold.

Do not underestimate the value of items that are personal or dismiss it. What California is going through, where people can only be glad animals and humans are safe, is a terrible thing that we pray stops now.

Losing homes is a big deal. Evacuating for your lives is worse. We pray for all of them, dealing with this awful situation. We send our comfort and love to anyone who lost homes and keepsakes like Billy Crystal, Eugene Levy, Paris Hilton, James Woods, Anthony Hopkins: all of you. We are sorry and give you all the respect and support we can send you, from our souls. Love, Carolyn & family.

Happy new year 2025, my friends!

I thought of Mom all day yesterday, five years since she went to the afterlife. Marigold & Spirit joined her in 2021 but Spirit lived to see Marigold's birthday. We will remember that on January 7, sweet, bright orange Mother to all our younger kitties. Of course, Dad has only been in Heaven four months. I did get wonderful photographs of the last daylight. Over a few days, Ron & I watched a few movies and played a few of the million used CDs we have bought.

We talked about "Anne Of Windy Poplars" in detail. Kerri looked up why her version was "Anne Of Windy Willows" instead of the Canadian edition. We found nothing wrong with it. We did not think Maud was dour. She discussed the cemetery in more detail, that characters had visited.

Kerri, I said "Rainbow Valley" is the last book I have and will read. I said I am not going to buy the last one, which I did not name. If we are okay with venting and outrage, we can read "Anne Of Ingleside" in unison. Or we can read that solo to see how we feel and finish with "Rainbow Valley" in harmony. Yes, several books were published out of order but I like aging the characters and events properly. Don't you?

Kerri & Leeanne, you were appalled, disgusted, and outraged by Susan's audacity to threaten a cat and tell people their baby couldn't go near his own pet, weren't you? You must have found Susan far past "annoying". I gather you questioned Anne & Gilbert not saying: "If you want to work for us, you will never threaten an animal, or tell us how to raise our Son, again!

Three stars makes sense for how much you enjoyed the rest of the novel. Susan's disgustingly inappropriate scene made two stars lucky. Didn't it piss you off that Susan's violent, overstepping remark spoiled a sentence, where the cat was finally being adored and appreciated!?Let one book compliment a cat: plainly and simply!!!!

Without that outrage, I would have reluctantly given two stars, because there were too many heavy-handed clichés, tropes, and hardships. I did not go as low as one star because I had loved the early chapters and some of the descriptions honouring feelings realistically.

It is too bad Maud's attitude hardened or dropped. I did not know she committed suicide. So did Margaret Laurence, after being told she had "incurable" cancer (according to mainstream medicine, poor thing). As we know from "The Stone Angel" and many other families in her Neepawa, Manitoba and African stories, her characters fought to live and succeed. She had a great attitude all through life. What a difference, from clinical depression or perhaps Maud had "situational depression"; unhappy current scenarios that are understandably upsetting. Like Leslie, she needed to change them. We didn't get the sense from her biography, even if behaving privately, that she was nuts about her marital partner.

When I asked how old Cornelia felt, it was to see if your impressions were incongruous to the revelation. We are told her age: we are not guessing. She was 8 years older than her Brother, who died when he was 20, fifteen years ago. Give or take a couple of years since that false preacher was in town.

I had a feeling one of you would state the "old maids used to be young" quip but I wasn't talking about being single. I sought other clues about Cornelia seeming like an elder of the town. I felt that she talked to Captain Jim in a way only an older contemporary would; at least elderly, in the 70s. A sixty year-old is young enough to be his child.

Finding out she was 43 years-old, nine younger than me (I am like a kid), was startling. It made me wonder if Maud was sloppy about back history, similar to forgetting Rachel's family and making cardboard cut-outs of Anne's Sister and Brother. Yes, Maud sure forgot Anne's hard origins.

I appreciate the importance of writing about hardship with care and grace. Fiction is the one place where all the miracles and hope we want to, can be true. Unless a book is about hardship or grief, or by someone who wants to convey what that was like; unwanted endings should be avoided. Reward the reader, create joy, show the outcomes we want and deserve to see in the world!

When I see difficulty in characters, you bet I think of animals and people who dealt with it. My care extends to fictional characters. I feel for creatures and people, including a flock of ducks (or whatever their creative group word) and certainly Anne's newborn baby. I don't feel sad only while I'm on that page, Kerri. This and other things I have read, bother me for years after. Don't put readers on emotional rollercoasters heedlessly, without proper preparation and handling afterwards.

What you said, Leeanne, is how I feel but you put more into words that makes me feel seen, heard, understood, and related to in solidarity.... thank you! I could hug you! You are brilliant: and when Canadians say this, we don't mean "clever". Brilliant is the synonym of a Stephen Hawkins "GENIUS". You described even better and farther, what I have started feeling for a way to put into words.

Further to all this, Joyce not living was unquestionably wrong. This was not a book about grief or hardship. What I tried to convey along with this, is that we were led to believe this was an enormously happy book about good days; never mind the synopsis Kerri got. I might expect it later but not in this series at all and not without preparation, a build-up. The title itself is "Anne's House Of Dreams". It is not a proper name of a house but promises joy and getting what we pray for: the safe life of Joyce topmost among prayers, miracles, and bliss!

Yes, Kerri, the newborn's brief presence was written about powerfully but Maud could have used her talent somewhere else. The death should not have happened at all. Negative situations should not exist for touching descriptions, or to shake jealously out of Leslie. I hope you weren't saying "the sorrow was worth the pretty description". It ruined the book for me and trust in Maud as a writer of books free of stress. Leeanne knew things about the author that I didn't.

Mentioning pregnancy difficulty would have made things a little better but Joyce should have lived. I explained, hinting made it sound like the author was hiding something pleasant to surprise readers with. The title, the series until now, hiding a big event.... that is not where you place a tragedy. I felt misled, which increased my shock and anger. Little was written well, plot wise.

There were astute descriptions of nature and feelings, including Anne leaving. Yes, there needed to be pain discussed longer for Gilbert & Anne. The author shouldn't have forced a good-bye to their house on top of the other struggles.

Captain Jim was healthy. He didn't need to die merely because he was 80 years-old. Never mind "people at that time" or I will fly wherever you are and throw a tomato. My Dad felt great at that age, until cancer abruptly ruined his kidneys. His Dad (born early in the 1900s) walked daily in his early 80s. My Dad felt great before cancer and was not an active lighthouse keeper, climbing stairs and breathing fresh air outdoors every day.

Yes, Captain Jim got his sunrise on the way to Heaven. Yes, he read his autobiography. I thought it was cringingly predictable and an immensely fabricated cliché, that Captain Jim went to the afterlife the day he was reading it and died exactly when he finished it. We would have enjoyed his passing much more of it had been natural. Read the book, discuss it, meet Anne's baby, James Matthew; have a few more walks and suppers together. Then may he have his sunset.

I am glad there was a photograph of him. How about of Anne's wedding? Any of her childhood with Matthew, Marilla, Dora, Davy? Gilbert may merely be a man making assumptions about a shy girl. All girls are shy in their teens and when they begin to date! It does not make us hurry marriage; it makes us cautious, even in present day! Religion had people marrying early. Society frowned on living together, spending a night, or sexuality at all.

To this day, religious girls marry early in relationships because they are guilted out of intimacy. You married to freely experiment with a beau, except you were stuck with it. I don't believe in sleeping with anyone without being a monogamous couple but testing chemistry and hard times, matters in our choices of mates.

Ron proposed when we were together 7 years and we savoured our engagement. We accepted a wedding invitation in England and had to see Scotland. We got back and Timmy was engaged too but married right away, in Ontario. Six month later, my favourite band, A-ha was playing only in Toronto. We had three plane tickets and hotels to pay off.

That year, we were told our apartment building was cancelling pets after a big renovation (as if animals sullied residences instead of brightening them with LIFE). We had to buy our first house that same summer.... and decided common-law marriage was good enough. Sigh.

I sure can tell you about the early 1900s in Canada! No, we have never heard of anyone having hired help in our vast, eclectic family trees!!!! If anyone had money to spare; you got new clothing, plumbing, perhaps a radio, record-player, or car. You both read my family history tribute to my beloved Dad. His Grandma had seven Sons and a Daughter in the early 1900s: on a farm. Dad's Mom is among seven siblings in the 1920s: both families did all the work. My Parents and Ron's are from the 1940s: no outside help, throughout three provinces. Ron was among five farm children in the 1960s and I was among three city kids born in thec1970s. In all these extended family branches, we took care of ourselves.

I wondered if Maud was elite. Going to university is less rare but still a luxury among many today. I am the only one who did in my family. Mark did business community college (our only form of saying "college"). Timmy's high school was vocational, with advanced training. My relatives who moved to Prince Edward Island said it is more rustic and old-fashioned; not modern or glamorous. The dignified, lovely old house they bought took work and had no plumbing: in the 1980s.

Kerri, it is nice to hear from you. Leeanne, thank you for the joy of blowing my mind, twice! It is a pleasure and revelation to receive other points of view and also find ourselves in harmony with each other's feelings and perceptions.

I am joining Ron for breakfast. It is good to say "hi" and look forward to e-mails between us. I hope Leeanne had a good bus ride to university and wonder when her next trip home is. I have a birthday / Christmas package to make. :) Hugs, Carolyn.

Kerri, pulling ourselves up after hard times is inspiring and touching, yes. It is NOT "the best part"! You don't need death and grief to write emotionally! The problem is, I am certain Maud did not write this staggering tragedy for the reasons you are granting her. The cost for Anne & Gilbert was too high. Their author should choose a different way to show strength, not a life permanently gone. You couldn't be more polite and gracious about disagreeing viewpoints and I hope I convey the same. I respectfully challenge one aspect.

I think you are applying the same "Oh well, tragedy builds character and gives readers a dramatic tear to wipe" that you do to every book you read. The extremeness of the "sad moment" does not belong in THIS series. How nicely terrible parts are written is meaningless. Maud can write poignantly about something besides someone's first baby not making it! Kerri, it felt squeezed in to great artificial effect and truly wrong. Your quote from Captain Jim about stopping, not going to far in writing, is apt.

You both know I admire you for tolerating subjects I will not. I prioritize a positive environment; the good Lord knows upsetting circumstances sometimes toppled real life. I grant you the same right to learn from it, cry. I don't want us to be the same. Sometimes, I read Patricia Cornwell, the thriller genre I avoid, or grim crime mysteries, which works at thickening the skin, as the saying goes. Good? Here we go.

Kerri, when I finish what I wanted to write at our Maggie Stiefvater conversation, one item is that I disagree negative characters are "more interesting". I am going to discuss how amazing it is when someone is able to be friendly, calm, fun - and that it takes WORK. It is like saying action films are more complicated, emotional, or interesting. It is falsely amped up. I live in a place where there are no oceans or mountains. I know where to look for vibrancy in subtle life.

Candidly put: you would not dare say how "educational", or "poignant" the physical deaths of my family are. Why dismiss it as acceptable to people's stories in writing? I appreciated and enjoyed my loved-ones while they were living. I valued Mom's keepsakes and little things in common with Dad and both their moments of fun humour. However, would you privately think: "The physical loss of five of Carolyn's closest family made her stronger. It is the most significant part of those years"? No, I know you would not think or feel that. The "best part" of anyone's life is when a miracle and prayer intervene and we are relieved.

For the most part, I tip my hat to you for being very clinical about stories that are far from anyone you know. You are like those Academy Award judges who can watch violence like "Precious" and praise those actors for skill in portraying depravatity. It is a talent. When I read stories, I know they aren't real, even though I invest passionate emotions. I **never forget** how such a situation might feel for a real family. I wondered if you might try it, to understand an I think you were missing. Imagine expecting your first baby, nothing is wrong, delivery day comes.... they don't live? Every time I read, I am impacted. I hope the bad things do not face me or anyone else. Anne's stories aren't real but I consider the impact of people who faced it in reality.

I have written very powerful things after the ascensions of Love but I felt sick and was traumatized by his early transition. The great writing and spectrum of emotions was not worth it, Kerri. I would rather that Love and all the rest of our loved-ones had survived! I gained and learned nothing, that were worth Conan vanishing. It shouldn't have happened. I am upset by the years we have not shared. I am sad that no matter how great his return, he is not in time to see his Mom or Dad's again; or my Mom & Dad. It is not "bittersweet" or "worthwhile" or "entertaining", no matter how talented and honest my words about it were. I can write passionately, with the honesty of all my heart, about something GOOD.

THIS is how I feel about some subjects that are wrong and off, in some stories. It did no good. It wasn't worth it.

I sure do admire the beautiful writing, except in parts when extraneous adjectives and adverbs toppled the pleasure of some sentences. I think likewise about Leslie's uselessness but see what you are saying: about it feeling good for her to embrace happiness and freedom now. I grant you that.

Giving up the house was overdone addition, as if this author wants everything to be about wistfulness and good-byes and forgot how to be poignant with hapy things. Joy and fun and permanence exist in adulthood, amid whatever needs to change. The logic for the new house was there but it was too much in a book full of ducks, cats, dogs, and people who died.

It is hard to enjoy a setting that keeps shifting. Something needs to be central and we let the author introduce us to new communities, homes, and friends numerous times. Enough.

Leeanne: yes to everything you have written, with relief for not thinking the same way alone! Not only do we agree every inch but you expressed things I did not think of that instantly make sense to me. I did my best to express why the dear infant Joyce living one day, felt wrong and false; different from the majority of novels in which Kerri rightfully accepts it as "the good and hardness of life". You dug up more reasons to support what I tried to identify and I am amazed and grateful.

Fresh insight is my greatest joy in reading with you, my friends! I am glad you both took to the idea of writing what you want to first and answering posts later.

Leeanne's revelation is staggering and instantly strikes me as being true. Maud lowered herself to ruining a happy, light series so that Anne might be more relatable to the self-despressing Leslie! That is terrible but I can see that is what she did! I think Anne said her life wasn't always happy or easy but all she needed to do was tell a bit of her early life story. Needing to find a new home because both her parents went to Heaven is hard. As a grown-up, it is hard enough and I am finding new family in a smaller way.

I felt the same way about Anne's early life and I am of the same mind of most of what Kerri writes and contemplates as well. I didn't write all of it out because we are in harmony a lot and sometimes, leaving one of you to say it was enough. Also, when we started, I only had a cell phone to type a little bit on with difficulty. Please know I appreciate all of your beautiful quotes and personal stories as well, even if I could not always write back about them immediately and directly.

Happy new year to you and your family, Kerri! Leeanne and I are having our turn in Manitoba and Ontario tonight, starting with her province! I need to bathe, dress, eat vegetarian breakfast with Ron. Then I am going outside to photograph the last daylight of my Dad's last year of life here on Earth with us. It is cloudy, in fact snowing, so there might not be a sunset later. However, the light of the sun is bright everywhere.

I will photograph our yard in this daylight and get a sunset later if there is one. If not, I have our home scenery and perhaps Ron will take a few photos of myself in our snowy yard on this New Year's Eve day. I will write Dad's name in the snow like I did for Mom, on her cloudy New Year's Eve. This time, perhaps I will write their names together in a heart afterwards and snap a photograph of that too. They are together and I am happy about that at least.

May my parents always be with me as well. I am saying good-bye today, to the last I had one of my beloved parents on Earth. It is a tradition I started with my baby cat, Love in 2014, that is something I need to do to handle a loved-ones's going. May I not say good-bye to anyone else's last year for a long time. May I simply enjoy New Year's Eve for fun.

I am grateful to both of you friends, for having you to tell these thoughts about myself and of books. Leeanne, I received a birthday card from you yesterday! I will tell you in e-mail as well: thank you, dearest Leeanne! Prairie seems to have a twelve hour delay, locally. Love always, your friend, Carolyn and family.

I am acquainted with a vocal reviewer, whom I appreciate speaking her mind thoroughly. She must have read everything pertaining to Maud Montgomery but they aren't all five star grades. The next volume, called "Anne Of Ingleside" is one I suggest we read solo, because it sounds like I would detest it and I don't want my contribution to be vents.

Gundala detested the housekeeper, Susan and warned she was in the novel a lot. That means skimming it for anything enjoyable! It is the end of my second box set and I have the next story in hardcover, "Rainbow Valley". You know I protested the animal killing synopsis of the last book and will not buy it at all. I hope Anne & Gilbert didn't move again. The original settings were almost as important as Anne Shirley.

Many reviewers graded "Anne Of Ingleside" low, saying Anne is hardly in it and her children are too perfect to believe. Others said they were annoying. Gundula straight-up hated Susan but wrote that she did not mind the children. I hope I enjoy them.

The characters I loved from previous novels - we met a LOT of them - right up to the new ones we love in this one, moved or don't appear. Maybe we will love the children but Anne is who we are here for and I don't like Maud phasing her out. If any personage HINTS at disliking cats or terminating an animal, volume 6 will instantly get one star. My patience reached the end for those offenses.

Please know, I am annoyed with people who are sappy about any first book / film / season, or only read / watch that one. I usually like later evolutions much better.

I avoid the first couple of "Friends" seasons, when Phoebe was a throat clearer. I am uninterested in any of the reruns, until Chandler falls in love with Monica and Ross gets rid of that bitch, Emily. I've heard enough people claim they like Star Trek but only watched the two oldest, commonest series. I finally tired of a waterfall of new casts and concepts and am skipping "Strange New Worlds". I watched and loved the other seven Star Trek shows. I am berserk for the "Picard" film to be made.

Be assured that reduced enjoyment is about downhill contents. Note that I gave five stars to the previous book, volume 5. If there weren't cat attacks in volume 3, it would have received five stars. I reveled in the AMAZING moment of Anne standing where her young parents lived, inherited their letters, and felt blessed in the room where she was born. I go into all of these books hoping to inhale wonderful moments like these.

I am glad I didn't spoil it, not that it was worth being shocked about. I would have felt frusrtated by "Oh well, bad things sometimes occur". I wanted to know if other readers were shattered out of the pleasure this novel had been.

The passing of Leslie's beloved dog shocked me, another needless and horrible one. I wrote in my update about that: "Geeze, Maud, do you have to fabricate everyone dying"? I did not expect it but afterwards, put it in the angry category of "Of course, Maud would do that". Your aim was true on everything I found entirely predictable.

Oh, you'll hate how Leslie's situation is resolved. It it way more "Deux-ex-machina" than it looks regarding surgery. She does nothing to act on her future's behalf for that or afterwards. You and Leeanne would have looked up that Greek expression, or I wonder if you knew it already.

I was offended by casually inventing the deaths of numerous ducks. Dick "chased them too much"? They could hide, fly, or speed away and Leslie and Cornelia stop him before an implausible extreme. Wild animals are chased with the threat of death by nature and are equipped to evade and out endure preditors. Animal death is casual to Maud and I lost respect for her the instant I saw that, in book 2.

Maud doesn't keep track of her book history and make sense. This is supposed to be a sometimes frustrated, bored, or angry man but harmless. Being childlike or mentally disabled does not necessarily equal being capable of or unaware of scaring or harming animals or being shut off mentally about causing damage. Cornelia announced "killing several ducks" as if it was only too bad, not horrible. I can give her a pass for not seeing her face and trust she said it with a sigh of "we can't help them now".

Yes, Rachel was going to live near some of her children but preferred to live in her neighbourhood when Marilla offered a partnership in her home. I appreciate that Rachel is family nowadays who helped rear Dora & Davy.

Unless Dora had school, I wondered at her not accompanying Marilla to Anne's births. Marilla had only travelled once prior but perhaps she got used to it.

Maud did not seem to know natural behaviour, development, or personalities either. Being prim and not physically affectionate when we met her does not mean she did not learn after raising two Daughters and a Son. At least, she would be moved by her Daughter, Anne having a baby and admiring the arms, legs, and perfect face and little bundle in her arms. Maud wrote Marilla as uninterestedly saying "Yes, those are hands and fit". What a way to ruin a moment by thinking a poised woman wouldn't enjoy the miracle of birth with her Daughter.

Anne never called her Daughter "white lady". It was only in Maud's sickeningly frivolous descriptions. I hate the verb "peeping". That is what birds do. Authors should use "peeking / peering".

I am certain Dora and perhaps Davy wrote to their Sister. Even though our previous novel was entirely epistolary, I guess Maud Montgomery wanted us to assume the family wrote, the same as not sharing pregnancy excitement.

Yes, telling Leslie and letting her decide about the operation is a must. It would be assuming that there was no solution for an unwanted marriage than keeping a person in something comparable to a partial coma. I was forced to come to that conclusion and am angry at myself for having to think about it at first. Truth and fairness to everything is who I am and what I believe in for every living creature.

The implications of Dick healing (ha ha, that sounds funny to write, as did a naughty sentence earlier that I'll try to remember for fun) were a good discussion to read and consider. It was contrived and portrayed Leslie as a wisp who does nothing to improve her own life. Otherwise, it was a great topic of consideration and conversation herein.

You are very right that Dick could discuss their marriage. What I didn't think of and love reading, is that he showed evidence of not wanting it either. Maybe he planned on travelling and seeing little of her, not thinking far enough about decently exerting legal freedom for her as well. Or, as a thinking person, he would not need supervision and Leslie could petition for a divorce he would understand.

How many stories have we three watched or read, wherein someone is disturbed over one predicament and one solution and did not look at far better ones as resolutions? You want to shake them, don't you? I don't believe in cheating and don't think there is any excuse. Set the other person free, then conduct another relationship. However, if you there is no relationship and something made it hard to change or retire the legal piece of paper, perhaps your right to move on is right and true under God and the law.

How old do you and Leeanne feel Cornelia is? Are we viewing a lady of 1917 as older than we should because she is judgemental and cranky, or was the author sloppy here as well? Cornelia seems to be a contemporary of Captain Jim's but younger. However, I did the math after her Brother was discussed twice and she adds up to be much younger than me; hardly older than Kerri. It doesn't seem right to me, how about you two? She said she knew Leslie since she was born but Leslie is 28, making Cornelia 7 years-old. She spoke like she knew Leslie and her family while she was an adult.

We get our impressions from a lot of information, not only our impressions of the lady's personality. That part might be biased and incorrect but the math does not work out with the history, to this clue solving mystery buff! See if you can find this part.
Cornelia names hers and her Brother's age differences, perhaps in an earlier chapter. She said he died at age 20. She told off that whacko conman impersonating a preacher that he had been gone 15 years and he was the only one she was calling her Brother.

I believe Petal & Angel want out on another miraculously warm day. Suggest to your friends that they photograph their Mom's last light in her last year, like I am for Dad tomorrow, New Year's Eve.

I glad you are still loving the writing and scenery. I did too. Yes, the clichés got worse than you are listing! Of course Owen falls for Leslie and she has that pointless struggle with a bond or commitment that isn't there. Of course he writes Captain Jim's book.... you are seeing them as clearly as I knew you would. It sounds like you are at three stars by now. Wait until that damn Susan, who I was indifferent about, threatens to harm a cat for approaching his own family! Two stars, Maud: suck it.

I looked forward to replying to your wonderful writing in this thread, as well as to yours and Shirin's magnificent understanding and impressions of "Blue Lily, Lily Blue". With a full keyboard and desktop computer before me: here I am! I am starting with your penultimate write-up of October.

Overlap on books with my Mom was so rare that it meant a lot. I didn't know what Grandma Adella read. She was a masterful musician, who had to have been self-taught or by a family member. I had Grandma Riedel until your age and didn't think of asking what she read, besides answering a gospel devotional workbook. I wonder what she would have read for pleasure after Grandpa retired and had plenty of time. I wonder what she read as a girl. Sometimes people love reading but forget to start. If I had queried her about her tastes of fiction or non-fiction, I could have brought books to try and see what preference arose.

Your Mom & Nana only need to tell you if they mind grim mystery cases. Anne Perry's characters and compassionate worlds, with intelligence and humour, are easy to love. Even for someone who dislikes historical fiction: me. My Mom preferred true crime, which is famous in podcasts now. Like most caring people, it disturbed her and she looked over her shoulder and did not go out alone. She was one who should not have been reading it. It is for people who can shake it off after they read or listened to it. Mom felt she was doing a duty to victims by lending an ear, which is true and I understand, for those who can handle it.

Mom & I had few genres or books in common but I cherish the ones that were in common for us. Donna Eden would have meant the world to her and made a difference for her. You already know I am certain Mom would be here if I had known the basics before 2019. Dad respects Mom's judgement and her faith shared the religious style in common with his. I'll bet she would amaze him with what she learned and tested about energy healing. In time to balance his moods that made so much difficult. Perhaps it would have deflected cancer for him altogether and for our baby Spirit as well.

I love your responses to what I appreciate about Anne Perry: handling family death and difficulty well. I did want to see Charlotte's & Thomas's wedding at the beginning of the second novel, or end of the first! It need not have been detailed but it was a point of interest to me that I don't think the authoress should have skipped. Seeing Thomas approach Charlotte's Dad might have been funny. Or perhaps it would be inspiring in how unselfishly and well they trusted that this was the right person for their Daughter. Like you, I enjoyed seeing them a year or two ahead but they could have smoothly moved to that after their wedding.

I might find careful clues in my review and will look at it. I can't recall why the first or more babies were buried. I think they died before or near birth; no one was killed. I don't think they were all still births. Coincidentally, I was correcting that baby Joyce lived all day, in our "Anne's House Of Dreams" discussion. Hers was not a still birth.

I can guess a Mom was unmarried or had the baby with someone else. I don't remember why more infants buried privately. This is the ideal place to tell me.

Ah, yes, this is the original Jemima! It is nice to be reminded whence she comes. You remind me she was a housekeeper of a primary victim or suspect in the second novel. Her name lives on. :) She might be still alive but I only saw Charlotte visit her once afterwards, in the scenes written for readers. We imagine family & friends visit off & on.

Yes, caring about the babies, Mothers, and women was a relief in that rigid circle of people. Charlotte is also right that fear of telling the truth or shocking anyone, creates lies or crimes. The need to question people uncovers things that aren't related, which people might not need to know. Police need to be sure to glean the information that does solve the mystery and combat a crime. Other private matters can be let be. The sooner people stop judging one another, the better off they are.

Yes, Charlotte's and Emily's help is the highlight for me, made plausible thankfully. I was not likely to have any interest in a male policeman solving anything and hardly read male authors at all, as a matter of fact. There is a reason gothic mystery authors of the 1940s to 1990s hid themselves with female pen names. I have no time for "John Dickson Carr" but eagerly collected "Doroth Daniels", who turns out to have been a male. Authors like Anne Perry knew that.

I like Thomas and the principal males in this series very much, however. I corrected this post for writing "William" by mistake a few times. I have always pictured Yannick Bisson's "William Murdoch" when I acquainted Thomas Pitt, even though I had not watched Yannick's shows or read Maureen Jennings' books. I have seen his face in previews for years and my parents loved and watched the early part of the series. I updated Dad a little and he was pleased William married and had a baby, in the TV version he knew. :)

I most notably savour and relish your impressions of these books, Kerri. Receiving replies to my writing is divine but you showing me a new reaction or interpretation is an abolute gift and pleasure. I look forward to you having that with your Mom and Grandma, in whatever you mutually read.

Ron is handpicking parts of "Energy Medicine" to read; whichever chapters interest him for now. He was encouraged to start at the beginning but I said "Whatever gets him reading and interested, is great". He was so happy to find Donna Eden's latest "Tapping" for me, his interest rose sky high and I am immensely grateful. He has not been miserable for a long time but his moods need balancing all the way. He needs to smile, laugh, joke, and be the first one to offer affection more. There is a little baggage to shake off and this is one great way to do it.

Anne's books are compassionate and realistic, made accessible through relatable people and humour. One thing her books do very well is show that wealthy people were neither uncaring nor selfish. They did not know what the poor or middle class dealt with; how they lived. These women surprisingly were not always educated, or exposed to what they might read. Charlotte, Emily, and later Aunt Vespasia, and Caroline, the girls' Mother learn this. They are sad but glad to know because now, they will help.

The next matter is for high society, law enforcement, and the government to decide: how do we best end huge neighbourhoods of poverty, illness, and crime? The first step is that people show compassion and lend a hand wherever they know of someone in need. The next is good men enter politics and vote on bills to abolish practices that do not work well. Later, whether or not it is in this series, good women need to add their force to voting too. End prejudice and entitlement, increase positive, useful benefits and laws. These, Anne teaches so that readers do not hate petty criminals or the wealthy. I think that is valuable and that her work is more worthwhile than as fiction entertainment.