I think this book was well-written. There are some beautiful descriptions and interesting characters. That's not to say that I liked it. Because I didn't. The type of lifestyle portrayed her kind of horrifies me. The main character's life choices, and his obsessions were kind of hard to read about.
But, another one down.
Friday, July 27, 2012
Saturday, July 7, 2012
Rebecca; Daphne du Maurier
This book is brilliantly written. It tells a real tale of all the characters in it in a masterful and surprising way. It is incredibly easy to sympathize with the main character; even when not always agreeing with her, being able to see the situations and places in the book described through her eyes is really what makes this book good.
This is one of the times that I think I can pretty honestly say that the movie is an accurate representation of the author's "vision". But this book is rather well-told, and I enjoyed it immensely. I cried too. I feel like most of the books I've read this year have made me cry.
Oh well. Anyways, good book. Recommended.
This is one of the times that I think I can pretty honestly say that the movie is an accurate representation of the author's "vision". But this book is rather well-told, and I enjoyed it immensely. I cried too. I feel like most of the books I've read this year have made me cry.
Oh well. Anyways, good book. Recommended.
Sunday, July 1, 2012
Les Miserables; Victor Hugo
Les Miserables is a series of tales of human misery and redemption. The theme is life-changing love and it is powerful.
I started this novel sometime during middle school. I'm glad now that I wasn't able to finish it at that time. Reading it now was an incredible experience.
Les Miserables is a beautiful book. Growing up, I loved the musical so much, and I still do love it now. The book, however, as Hugo meant it to be, is a wonderful and thorough masterpiece. Hugo really explains his characters and their backstories. He doesn't just tell you what is happening in the direct plot of the story, but what went on before that - you leave every situation with a very broad understanding of the events surrounding what you've just read about.
Hugo is genius. If anyone ever asks me which person from history I would want to have dinner with, I could answer. He has a beautiful way of expressing emotions and is a phenomenal storyteller, as long as you can go with him down his historical interludes.
All I can say is, persevere! It's worth it!
Some quotes I loved:
"She had never been pretty; her whole life, which had been a succession of pious works, had finally cloaked her in a kind of transparent whiteness, and in growing old she had acquired the beauty of goodness."
"She was a pretty blonde with fine teeth. For dowry, she had gold and pearls; but the gold was on her head and the pearls were in her mouth."
"Love has no middle term; either it destroys or it saves."
"Only the epic has the right to fill twelve thousand lines with one battle."
"The audacity to die well always moves men."
"Because things are unpleasant ... that is no reason for being unjust toward God."
I started this novel sometime during middle school. I'm glad now that I wasn't able to finish it at that time. Reading it now was an incredible experience.
Les Miserables is a beautiful book. Growing up, I loved the musical so much, and I still do love it now. The book, however, as Hugo meant it to be, is a wonderful and thorough masterpiece. Hugo really explains his characters and their backstories. He doesn't just tell you what is happening in the direct plot of the story, but what went on before that - you leave every situation with a very broad understanding of the events surrounding what you've just read about.
Hugo is genius. If anyone ever asks me which person from history I would want to have dinner with, I could answer. He has a beautiful way of expressing emotions and is a phenomenal storyteller, as long as you can go with him down his historical interludes.
All I can say is, persevere! It's worth it!
Some quotes I loved:
"She had never been pretty; her whole life, which had been a succession of pious works, had finally cloaked her in a kind of transparent whiteness, and in growing old she had acquired the beauty of goodness."
"She was a pretty blonde with fine teeth. For dowry, she had gold and pearls; but the gold was on her head and the pearls were in her mouth."
"Love has no middle term; either it destroys or it saves."
"Only the epic has the right to fill twelve thousand lines with one battle."
"The audacity to die well always moves men."
"Because things are unpleasant ... that is no reason for being unjust toward God."
Thursday, May 17, 2012
the five people you meet in heaven; Mitch Albom
Shortest book I've read so far this year. I took this one down in less than two hours. I almost wish it hadn't been that easy.
It's interesting how many of the books I've read this year have some sort of perception of God or heaven as a huge part of them. This did. I don't think heaven is going to be like this, because I think heaven is going to be blessedly free of self-concern. I think we just get to worship and we don't have to particularly be worried about learning lessons anymore.
However. That being said, the lessons in this book are fantastic. I think the plot is interesting and interestingly conveyed. I think the story is well-written. I liked it a lot. I cried. Not that that's a huge thing. Especially when I'm crying over cat food commercials where the kitty gets a home out of the rain storm. Yeah.
So here's where you should stop reading if you want to read the book. And not know anything else about it.
The main character dies pretty quickly. That's not a real spoiler because you know this from the very first page.
He goes to "heaven" and has to meet a series of five people who each have to illuminate a piece of his life for him and teach him a lesson about what that really meant.
I really think the lessons were good.
#1 "It is because the human spirit knows, deep down, that all lives intersect. That death doesn't just take someone, it misses someone else, and in the small distance between being taken and being missed, lives are changed."
Wow. That is a fascinating idea. It gives the idea, "it could have been me", a whole new sense of depth. I'm not sure how biblical or divine this perspective is - I think it gives too much credence to the idea of chance, but I think it's important to think from another person's perspective. To cherish life and to realize that we don't know God's plan. We might have years or minutes, no one knows the hour of their death. And it is important to mourn with those who mourn. We are a community and we should support each other.
#2 "You don't get it. Sacrifice is a part of life. It's supposed to be. It's not something to regret. It's something to aspire to. Little sacrifices. Big sacrifices. A mother works so her son can go to school. A daughter moves home to take care of her sick father... That's the thing. Sometimes when you sacrifice something precious, you're not really losing it. You're just passing it on to someone else."
Beautifully said, Mitch. This lesson is particularly dear to my heart because, for one, it is one of the cardinal traits of my husband's personality. He believes in duty and sacrifice and doing what is right because it is right and no other reason. People are shocked when they hear I agreed to move so far away from home when I married, but it seems like such a small sacrifice when compared with the joy I get from living and loving and supporting my husband.
We sacrifice around us all of the time. It is so easy to think of sacrifice personified in the presence of an American soldier, and somehow to downplay it because it's talked about so much. But sacrifice is important in all of us, true heroes and people who think they are just living the day to day. And this book does a good job of putting that concept on display.
#3 "Holding anger is a poison. It eats you from inside. We think that hating is a weapon that attacks the person who harmed us. But hatred is a curved blade. And the harm we do, we do to ourselves."
I can hold a grudge with the best of them. I really can. It was actually one of the things my dad really thought Patrick should know before he married me. I'll hold them longer if the word or deed was done against someone I loved than against myself, but that's not the point. This quote is fantastic though. So many of us won't let go of hurts, and they change the entire course of our lives.
#4 "Life has to end. Love doesn't."
I don't really know what to say about this one. It has to do with loving someone even after they've gone, but I've never really lost someone I loved. Not really. It makes me cry even to think about it, really. But I believe love should be stronger than death, even if it changes form.
#5 I can't quote this one. It's complicated. But the thrust of it is that our lives have purpose. Who we are and what we do is purposeful.
It's a beautiful thought that even through experiences that we think or horrible, or that bring us to a place where we don't necessarily want to be, a purpose is being worked out. I think that's important too.
I was leery about this book, but I really did end up liking it a lot. It is more than worth the short amount of time it takes to read.
It's interesting how many of the books I've read this year have some sort of perception of God or heaven as a huge part of them. This did. I don't think heaven is going to be like this, because I think heaven is going to be blessedly free of self-concern. I think we just get to worship and we don't have to particularly be worried about learning lessons anymore.
However. That being said, the lessons in this book are fantastic. I think the plot is interesting and interestingly conveyed. I think the story is well-written. I liked it a lot. I cried. Not that that's a huge thing. Especially when I'm crying over cat food commercials where the kitty gets a home out of the rain storm. Yeah.
So here's where you should stop reading if you want to read the book. And not know anything else about it.
The main character dies pretty quickly. That's not a real spoiler because you know this from the very first page.
He goes to "heaven" and has to meet a series of five people who each have to illuminate a piece of his life for him and teach him a lesson about what that really meant.
I really think the lessons were good.
#1 "It is because the human spirit knows, deep down, that all lives intersect. That death doesn't just take someone, it misses someone else, and in the small distance between being taken and being missed, lives are changed."
Wow. That is a fascinating idea. It gives the idea, "it could have been me", a whole new sense of depth. I'm not sure how biblical or divine this perspective is - I think it gives too much credence to the idea of chance, but I think it's important to think from another person's perspective. To cherish life and to realize that we don't know God's plan. We might have years or minutes, no one knows the hour of their death. And it is important to mourn with those who mourn. We are a community and we should support each other.
#2 "You don't get it. Sacrifice is a part of life. It's supposed to be. It's not something to regret. It's something to aspire to. Little sacrifices. Big sacrifices. A mother works so her son can go to school. A daughter moves home to take care of her sick father... That's the thing. Sometimes when you sacrifice something precious, you're not really losing it. You're just passing it on to someone else."
Beautifully said, Mitch. This lesson is particularly dear to my heart because, for one, it is one of the cardinal traits of my husband's personality. He believes in duty and sacrifice and doing what is right because it is right and no other reason. People are shocked when they hear I agreed to move so far away from home when I married, but it seems like such a small sacrifice when compared with the joy I get from living and loving and supporting my husband.
We sacrifice around us all of the time. It is so easy to think of sacrifice personified in the presence of an American soldier, and somehow to downplay it because it's talked about so much. But sacrifice is important in all of us, true heroes and people who think they are just living the day to day. And this book does a good job of putting that concept on display.
#3 "Holding anger is a poison. It eats you from inside. We think that hating is a weapon that attacks the person who harmed us. But hatred is a curved blade. And the harm we do, we do to ourselves."
I can hold a grudge with the best of them. I really can. It was actually one of the things my dad really thought Patrick should know before he married me. I'll hold them longer if the word or deed was done against someone I loved than against myself, but that's not the point. This quote is fantastic though. So many of us won't let go of hurts, and they change the entire course of our lives.
#4 "Life has to end. Love doesn't."
I don't really know what to say about this one. It has to do with loving someone even after they've gone, but I've never really lost someone I loved. Not really. It makes me cry even to think about it, really. But I believe love should be stronger than death, even if it changes form.
#5 I can't quote this one. It's complicated. But the thrust of it is that our lives have purpose. Who we are and what we do is purposeful.
It's a beautiful thought that even through experiences that we think or horrible, or that bring us to a place where we don't necessarily want to be, a purpose is being worked out. I think that's important too.
I was leery about this book, but I really did end up liking it a lot. It is more than worth the short amount of time it takes to read.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Emma; Jane Austen
This has been on my shelf for so long. SO LONG. And I didn't read it, because as much as I enjoyed the Gwyneth Paltrow rendition (?) of the story, it also sort of bores me and I was afraid. Afraid of trying to get into it and being bored by trifles.
Please don't think too poorly of me for that fear.
The back of the book explains it quite well, and helps me understand why I did end up enjoying it so much.
"Jane Austen's intimate study of a complex young lady of twenty, whose egotism, snobbishness, malice, and zeal for arranging the affairs of others leads her into errors of judgement which she must eventually face." (There's another sentence to that part, but again, it gives away the ending and it still horrifies me that the back-of-book summarizers don't have some sort of taboo against it. And by "gives away" I mean tells you the ending.)
There's only one word in that summary that I disagree with, and am puzzled by. "Malice." I thought I had a pretty good understanding of that word so I looked to Webster to make sure: "desire to cause pain, injury, or distress to another". Yes. That's what I thought. I do not find it permissible for that word to be included in a description of Emma Woodhouse's character. I wonder why it was allowed and I wish to strike it from the record.
This book is a wonderful character study. As far as I'm concerned it is on par with a work of Dickens - but like a mini Dickens, because I haven't read one of his this short yet.
This is what the rest of the back of the book has to say:
"Although Jane Austen is reported to have described Emma as "a heroine whom no one but myself will much like", many readers have thought the novel her greatest. Mark Schorer, in his introduction, also places it at the head of her achievements."
Okay. I'm not sure I'd go that far. I have to read the rest of her works, I suppose. But ... I mean, it is a Jane Austen. You have to expect certain things, and most certainly not expect others. Like... don't expect a plethora of action sequences, but do expect witty conversation, and inevitable embarrassments for the main character. You get that. But I liked this book. I think it is a great "setting-down" of a person's thoughts, situations and growth-- and has a lot of interesting insight.
"The first error, and the worst, lay at her door. It was foolish, it was wrong, to take so active a part in bringing any two people together. It was adventuring too far, assuming too much, making light of what ought to be serious -- a trick of what ought to be simple. She was quite concerned and ashamed, and resolved to do such things no more."
Please don't think too poorly of me for that fear.
The back of the book explains it quite well, and helps me understand why I did end up enjoying it so much.
"Jane Austen's intimate study of a complex young lady of twenty, whose egotism, snobbishness, malice, and zeal for arranging the affairs of others leads her into errors of judgement which she must eventually face." (There's another sentence to that part, but again, it gives away the ending and it still horrifies me that the back-of-book summarizers don't have some sort of taboo against it. And by "gives away" I mean tells you the ending.)
There's only one word in that summary that I disagree with, and am puzzled by. "Malice." I thought I had a pretty good understanding of that word so I looked to Webster to make sure: "desire to cause pain, injury, or distress to another". Yes. That's what I thought. I do not find it permissible for that word to be included in a description of Emma Woodhouse's character. I wonder why it was allowed and I wish to strike it from the record.
This book is a wonderful character study. As far as I'm concerned it is on par with a work of Dickens - but like a mini Dickens, because I haven't read one of his this short yet.
This is what the rest of the back of the book has to say:
"Although Jane Austen is reported to have described Emma as "a heroine whom no one but myself will much like", many readers have thought the novel her greatest. Mark Schorer, in his introduction, also places it at the head of her achievements."
Okay. I'm not sure I'd go that far. I have to read the rest of her works, I suppose. But ... I mean, it is a Jane Austen. You have to expect certain things, and most certainly not expect others. Like... don't expect a plethora of action sequences, but do expect witty conversation, and inevitable embarrassments for the main character. You get that. But I liked this book. I think it is a great "setting-down" of a person's thoughts, situations and growth-- and has a lot of interesting insight.
"The first error, and the worst, lay at her door. It was foolish, it was wrong, to take so active a part in bringing any two people together. It was adventuring too far, assuming too much, making light of what ought to be serious -- a trick of what ought to be simple. She was quite concerned and ashamed, and resolved to do such things no more."
The Da Vinci Code; Dan Brown
Okay.
I read it. Finally.
I didn't understand its popularity and the hysteria that seethed around it in a mass of annoyed Catholics and other Christian groups.
So I listened to two sermons by Father Robert Barron and I guess I get their point. The claim in the book that Christ wasn't or isn't divine would be cause for annoyance and uproar--
If the whole thing hadn't seemed quite so ridiculous. And Father Barron did a good job in his first sermon on the topic of saying why the claim that Christ's divinity was an invention of the 4th Century was so ridiculous.
I guess I'll speak apart from all of the anti-Catholic sentiment that the book, I don't know, espouses? I will simply treat this as a work of fiction. Which it is. Does Brown even make the claim that everything in it is true? I hope not.
In any case. Why was this book even popular? I'm guessing because it tread in such highly charged waters. It took on a subject in a fictional and adventurous sense that other books and authors hadn't. That is the only reason I can see for its popularity.
It was a mystery/adventure story. Is. Whatever. As far as I'm concerned... it wasn't that great. It was interesting enough, I suppose, and there were some very "clever" puzzles, but it nothing new, and nothing that absorbing. Brown makes good use of suspense and holding on to it as long as possible to keep interest going. He has interesting timing.
But I saw nothing in the book that particularly makes me think it deserves to be in the company of some of the other books on this list. His characters were unimaginative and saw very little growth throughout the course of the story. The plot was... foreseeable.
The only particularly good thing about this book being on the list was that because it was so easy to read, it didn't cause me to pause in reveries of thought and self-searching, even as Moby Dick did in many places.
I wouldn't place it very high on any reading list. There are SO many other, worthier titles -- even as far as children's books, that I would recommend.
Feel free to argue with me. I would love to see more merit in this book. My parents were here so it took me like three days to read it; which is just embarrassing.
I read it. Finally.
I didn't understand its popularity and the hysteria that seethed around it in a mass of annoyed Catholics and other Christian groups.
So I listened to two sermons by Father Robert Barron and I guess I get their point. The claim in the book that Christ wasn't or isn't divine would be cause for annoyance and uproar--
If the whole thing hadn't seemed quite so ridiculous. And Father Barron did a good job in his first sermon on the topic of saying why the claim that Christ's divinity was an invention of the 4th Century was so ridiculous.
I guess I'll speak apart from all of the anti-Catholic sentiment that the book, I don't know, espouses? I will simply treat this as a work of fiction. Which it is. Does Brown even make the claim that everything in it is true? I hope not.
In any case. Why was this book even popular? I'm guessing because it tread in such highly charged waters. It took on a subject in a fictional and adventurous sense that other books and authors hadn't. That is the only reason I can see for its popularity.
It was a mystery/adventure story. Is. Whatever. As far as I'm concerned... it wasn't that great. It was interesting enough, I suppose, and there were some very "clever" puzzles, but it nothing new, and nothing that absorbing. Brown makes good use of suspense and holding on to it as long as possible to keep interest going. He has interesting timing.
But I saw nothing in the book that particularly makes me think it deserves to be in the company of some of the other books on this list. His characters were unimaginative and saw very little growth throughout the course of the story. The plot was... foreseeable.
The only particularly good thing about this book being on the list was that because it was so easy to read, it didn't cause me to pause in reveries of thought and self-searching, even as Moby Dick did in many places.
I wouldn't place it very high on any reading list. There are SO many other, worthier titles -- even as far as children's books, that I would recommend.
Feel free to argue with me. I would love to see more merit in this book. My parents were here so it took me like three days to read it; which is just embarrassing.
Monday, April 9, 2012
Moby Dick; Herman Melville
"I feel deadly faint, bowed, and humped, as though I were Adam, staggering beneath the piled centuries since Paradise."
I will lie neither to myself nor you. This book is painful to read. Moby Dick. It is almost set up on a pedestal, like some sort of king of American literature, unconquerable, proud, and menacing. It is a classic of epic and intimidating proportions. A monolith as big as its title character.
It is an amazing book. It is filled with unlooked-for beauty in its prose. At one moment struggling though a less than captivating description of the finer points of cetology, in the next being struck in the face by the masterful way in which your narrator, Ishmael, describes some aspect of life, or human nature or the sea.
This book is worthy of the label "classic". It should be read. My only advice is to go into the reading of it with an open mind and dedication. It was not easy for me to read. I'm pretty sure I've never taken this long to read a book in my entire life; and I have definitely read longer ones. But it is challenging and beautiful and worth while. I'm really glad to have finally read it and I think that I will again in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)