Technically, I read Hamlet once before. But last time I read it was in early summer of 2008, so I was a little... sick and I didn't really absorb any of it. While I recognized the general plot and a few lines, I really felt as if I was reading it for the first time.
And I must say, I think Hamlet is my new favorite Shakespeare play, just beating out Merchant of Venice. Was the lapse out of iambic pentameter a way of indicating Hamlet's madness? I thought so, but I suppose I'll have to ask my teacher or something, as I'm not positive.
I really loved all of the foils in the play- how Laertes and Fortinbras were foils to Hamlet, and how Polonius's family was a foil to Hamlet's family. I love contrasts and paralels and fun stuff like that :)
I don't get why Ophelia has been the inspiration for so many books/essays/movies. I understand that her character was tragic and stuff, and that she lacked independence, but why the huge preoccupation with her? I've read two essay collections with "Ophelia" in the title.
Is the reader supposed to dislike Claudius? Really, I didn't have a problem nwith him. While he was a murderer and married Gertrude even though it was kind of incest, I was repulsed or annoyed by him at all.
Wow, this is really disroganized. And I used the word "stuff" twice. But I am lazy. So this is as good as it's going to get.
Total Book Count: 27
NonFic: 14 (52%)
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
Porn and Brains
I picked up A World of Light by Floyd Skloot at the library, from the 612 section. The back cover said it was a story about a man's neurological degeneration after a virus attacked him. It was nothing of the sort. The man's brain disorder was barely mentioned. The first third of the book was about his mother's Alzheimer's disease, while the second two thirds were about his house, and his well, and other extremely boring subjects. I do not care that your well only yielded 4 gallons of water per hour when it should have yielded 80. I don't care how you drilled for a new one. I don't care how much you hated snow or how your house was too small.
I was so bored. This is why I usually don't like memoirs. Things that are interesting to an autobiographer usually don't matter to anyone else. Honestly, if I weren't hoping for the story to turn back towards his mother in the Alzheimer's ward, I wouldn't have kept reading (note: it barely did).
Next, I read Black Hole by Charles Burns, a long graphic novel. It was awful. It was about these teens who turned into semi-monsters after they had sex with other people with the monster "bug". Basically, the book consisted of a lot of cartoonish nudity. At times I felt like I was reading porn. Really, the entire book seemed to have no purpose other than to display boobs. Plus, there was far too much weed for my liking.
I at least read one good book this week. A Mind of Its Own: How Our Brain Distorts and Deceives by Cordelia Fine was excellent. It was written in incredibly simple language, and it taught me a lot without dumbing the information down too much. Basically, the book highlighted how our brains are delusional, bigoted, weak-willed, vain, and pig-headed. It was incredibly interesting. I think I'll actually have to go out and buy it to add to my collection.
Unfortunately, I don't think I'm going to hit 31 books for this month. Oh well, 27 or so is still pretty impressive.
Total Books: 26
Nonfiction: 14 (53.8%)
I was so bored. This is why I usually don't like memoirs. Things that are interesting to an autobiographer usually don't matter to anyone else. Honestly, if I weren't hoping for the story to turn back towards his mother in the Alzheimer's ward, I wouldn't have kept reading (note: it barely did).
Next, I read Black Hole by Charles Burns, a long graphic novel. It was awful. It was about these teens who turned into semi-monsters after they had sex with other people with the monster "bug". Basically, the book consisted of a lot of cartoonish nudity. At times I felt like I was reading porn. Really, the entire book seemed to have no purpose other than to display boobs. Plus, there was far too much weed for my liking.
I at least read one good book this week. A Mind of Its Own: How Our Brain Distorts and Deceives by Cordelia Fine was excellent. It was written in incredibly simple language, and it taught me a lot without dumbing the information down too much. Basically, the book highlighted how our brains are delusional, bigoted, weak-willed, vain, and pig-headed. It was incredibly interesting. I think I'll actually have to go out and buy it to add to my collection.
Unfortunately, I don't think I'm going to hit 31 books for this month. Oh well, 27 or so is still pretty impressive.
Total Books: 26
Nonfiction: 14 (53.8%)
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
5 Books and an Apology
I"M SORRY, OKAY! I'm sorry, fictional people who read my blog. I've been showered with comments lately. I know you've all been wondering where I am. I know that your lives have been incomplete for the past nine days.
But I've been busy. I'm in the middle of midterms, plus I had a group project for AP History (which basically means a really big project for me to do myself, 'cause I'm cool like that). I've also been slacking on reading a little bit. I am no longer averaging a book a day! I've only read 5 books since I last wrote.
"Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" by Richard P. Feynman 1/18/2010
Saint Joan by George Bernard Shaw 1/19/2010
Migraines and Other Headaches by William B. Young 1/20/2010
Man Search for Meaning by Viktor E. Frankl 1/21/2010
The Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood by Rebecca Wells 1/24/2010
I still have to study for my Chemistry midterm, so these blurbs are going to be a bit short (SORRY, fictional people. I said sorry!)
Feynman's was definitely the best. It was basically a collection of autobiographical stories about Richard P. Feynman, who won the Nobel prize for physics. It was interesting. He was quirky, and a genius, and generally pretty awesome. The book made me want to do something with my life, so I can write a cool autobiography. In addition to being clever, the book was just freaking funny. Smart-funny. Anyway, great book.
I reread Saint Joan to study for the midterm. I've already read it twice. It's not a play that gets better with time. I was pretty bored. So bored, in fact, that I'm, not going to write anymore about it.
The Migraines book was interesting-ish. It was basically a diagnostic manual. It presented the types of headaches, different treatments, and different symptoms clearly and simply, but it's hard to make a 200 page books about headaches terribly interesting. I did learn that I have migraines/tension headaches/trigeminal neuralgia. Basically, I just need to relax. Woot.
People in hospitals kept telling me to read Man's Search for Meaning, but I never got around to it. The first half, which recounted Frankl's experience in Auschwitz, was interesting. It mixed his philosophy and his story. The second half was less than interesting. He basically outlined what his whole psychology philosophy was, but I already knew from the first half of the book.
Ya-Yas was excellent. It was funny, and quaint, and made me want to make more friends so that we can grow old together and be cute/cool little grannies. I liked that it was an adult fiction novel that didn't just focus on divorce, or sex, or female-empowerment. I usually have very little patience for books aimed at middle-aged women. This one, however, was very good. It kept my attention, and the characters were developed really well.
I have a few books on my list right now. I walked to the library after school. After Chem tomorrow, I plan on reading all afternoon.
And btw, today was a good day :)
But I've been busy. I'm in the middle of midterms, plus I had a group project for AP History (which basically means a really big project for me to do myself, 'cause I'm cool like that). I've also been slacking on reading a little bit. I am no longer averaging a book a day! I've only read 5 books since I last wrote.
"Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" by Richard P. Feynman 1/18/2010
Saint Joan by George Bernard Shaw 1/19/2010
Migraines and Other Headaches by William B. Young 1/20/2010
Man Search for Meaning by Viktor E. Frankl 1/21/2010
The Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood by Rebecca Wells 1/24/2010
I still have to study for my Chemistry midterm, so these blurbs are going to be a bit short (SORRY, fictional people. I said sorry!)
Feynman's was definitely the best. It was basically a collection of autobiographical stories about Richard P. Feynman, who won the Nobel prize for physics. It was interesting. He was quirky, and a genius, and generally pretty awesome. The book made me want to do something with my life, so I can write a cool autobiography. In addition to being clever, the book was just freaking funny. Smart-funny. Anyway, great book.
I reread Saint Joan to study for the midterm. I've already read it twice. It's not a play that gets better with time. I was pretty bored. So bored, in fact, that I'm, not going to write anymore about it.
The Migraines book was interesting-ish. It was basically a diagnostic manual. It presented the types of headaches, different treatments, and different symptoms clearly and simply, but it's hard to make a 200 page books about headaches terribly interesting. I did learn that I have migraines/tension headaches/trigeminal neuralgia. Basically, I just need to relax. Woot.
People in hospitals kept telling me to read Man's Search for Meaning, but I never got around to it. The first half, which recounted Frankl's experience in Auschwitz, was interesting. It mixed his philosophy and his story. The second half was less than interesting. He basically outlined what his whole psychology philosophy was, but I already knew from the first half of the book.
Ya-Yas was excellent. It was funny, and quaint, and made me want to make more friends so that we can grow old together and be cute/cool little grannies. I liked that it was an adult fiction novel that didn't just focus on divorce, or sex, or female-empowerment. I usually have very little patience for books aimed at middle-aged women. This one, however, was very good. It kept my attention, and the characters were developed really well.
I have a few books on my list right now. I walked to the library after school. After Chem tomorrow, I plan on reading all afternoon.
And btw, today was a good day :)
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Neuology and Illness
I was at the library on Friday because our modem was broken, so I didn't have Internet at home (oh horror!), and I picked up a few neuroscience books on a whim. Dewey Decimal section 616. So far, I've read two of them. One about Schizophrenia, the other about Alzheimer's.
Recovered, Not Cured: A Journey through Schizophrenia by Richard McLean was really interesting. McLean told the story of his own struggle with the illness, how he deteriorated, and how he finally got help. I've known a handful of people with schizophrenia, but I haven't known any of them well. McLean interspersed his own drawings with the text to illustrate some of the things he saw/thought of/etc. while he was ill. My main complaint about the book was that it seemed as if McLean assumed that the reader already knew him at the beginning. Sometimes, there just wasn't enough detail to fully understand a situation that he was describing. Overall, 7.5/10. It was just plain cool to read about.
In Sickness and in Health: Caring for a Loved One with Alzheimer's by William M. Grubbs (aged 94) was not quite as good. It didn't really teach me anything that I didn't already know about Alzheimer's. Grubbs wrote about taking care of his wife as she deteriorated. Honestly, I got a little bored at parts. Still, it was an interesting perspective. I've always had a fear of being a burden in old age: I don't want to have kids who have to drag their children to come visit me, or deal with putting me through a nursing home. That being said, it's pretty much inevitable unless I die young.
6.5/10
As anyone reading this can probably tell, I'm not in the mood to write right now. Thus the brevity and vagueness of these blurbs.
Total Books: 18
Total Nonfic: 9 (50% Woot!)
Recovered, Not Cured: A Journey through Schizophrenia by Richard McLean was really interesting. McLean told the story of his own struggle with the illness, how he deteriorated, and how he finally got help. I've known a handful of people with schizophrenia, but I haven't known any of them well. McLean interspersed his own drawings with the text to illustrate some of the things he saw/thought of/etc. while he was ill. My main complaint about the book was that it seemed as if McLean assumed that the reader already knew him at the beginning. Sometimes, there just wasn't enough detail to fully understand a situation that he was describing. Overall, 7.5/10. It was just plain cool to read about.
In Sickness and in Health: Caring for a Loved One with Alzheimer's by William M. Grubbs (aged 94) was not quite as good. It didn't really teach me anything that I didn't already know about Alzheimer's. Grubbs wrote about taking care of his wife as she deteriorated. Honestly, I got a little bored at parts. Still, it was an interesting perspective. I've always had a fear of being a burden in old age: I don't want to have kids who have to drag their children to come visit me, or deal with putting me through a nursing home. That being said, it's pretty much inevitable unless I die young.
6.5/10
As anyone reading this can probably tell, I'm not in the mood to write right now. Thus the brevity and vagueness of these blurbs.
Total Books: 18
Total Nonfic: 9 (50% Woot!)
Thursday, January 14, 2010
More Brain Science!
Yesterday, I was sitting in the school library reading the brain science book I mentioned, The Accidental Mind by David J. Linden. I was about 60 pages in when I was confronted with a picture of the skull of Phineas Gage along with a brief blurb about the remarkable accident that befell him. I had seen the book Phineas Gage: A Gruesome but True Story about Brain Science by John Fleischman on display on the top floor of the library, so I ran up, checked it out, and took a break from TAM to read it.
I’m glad that I did. In The Accidental Mind, I was a little confused by some of Linden’s explanations of the chemistry of neurology. In addition to telling Gage’s story, Phineas Gage also explained neuroscience much more simply. Thus, I was able to better understand The Accidental Mind once I finished Phineas Gage.
Phineas Gage was a railroad foreman in the mid 1800s. In a railroad accident, a 13 foot tamping iron blasted through his left cheek, up through his skull, and out the top of his head, taking away chunks of his brain. However, he fully recovered. The only thing that changed about him was his personality. Formerly kind, level-headed, and fair, Gage became rude, obnoxious, and unreasonable after the accident. The author did an excellent job of explaining not only the course of events that followed his accident, but also the science behind them. I really enjoyed it. 8/10
The Accidental Mind: How Brain Evolution Has Given Us Love, Memory, Dreams, and God was equally interesting once I got back to it. The brain science explained was more complex, yet not overly complex. I was able to follow everything, and it was really interesting. Some of the information mentioned in The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and The Secret Family was repeated in the book. It was cool to be able to think ‘Ooh! I know that!’. The first 80 pages of the book were boring in parts, because they focused more on the science and less on the practical applications. But, the information was necessary in order to understand the examples provided in the rest of the book. It was interesting. I’m thinking that I might be serious about neurology as a possible career path. I’ve certainly enjoyed the neurology-related books I’ve been reading. 8/10.
Total Books: 16
Total Nonfiction: 7 (43.75%)
I’m glad that I did. In The Accidental Mind, I was a little confused by some of Linden’s explanations of the chemistry of neurology. In addition to telling Gage’s story, Phineas Gage also explained neuroscience much more simply. Thus, I was able to better understand The Accidental Mind once I finished Phineas Gage.
Phineas Gage was a railroad foreman in the mid 1800s. In a railroad accident, a 13 foot tamping iron blasted through his left cheek, up through his skull, and out the top of his head, taking away chunks of his brain. However, he fully recovered. The only thing that changed about him was his personality. Formerly kind, level-headed, and fair, Gage became rude, obnoxious, and unreasonable after the accident. The author did an excellent job of explaining not only the course of events that followed his accident, but also the science behind them. I really enjoyed it. 8/10
The Accidental Mind: How Brain Evolution Has Given Us Love, Memory, Dreams, and God was equally interesting once I got back to it. The brain science explained was more complex, yet not overly complex. I was able to follow everything, and it was really interesting. Some of the information mentioned in The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and The Secret Family was repeated in the book. It was cool to be able to think ‘Ooh! I know that!’. The first 80 pages of the book were boring in parts, because they focused more on the science and less on the practical applications. But, the information was necessary in order to understand the examples provided in the rest of the book. It was interesting. I’m thinking that I might be serious about neurology as a possible career path. I’ve certainly enjoyed the neurology-related books I’ve been reading. 8/10.
Total Books: 16
Total Nonfiction: 7 (43.75%)
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Thus Spoke Zarathustra
This is my impression of the first half of Thus Spoke Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche. I started to write it when I was about 150 pages in, because I was just pissed. So here:
Nietzsche is freaking full of himself. I suppose, to be a philosopher, you sort of have to be. You need to believe that your ideas are right, and thus, that you are clever for think about them (unless your philosophy is that no one is smart, which would be contradictory; how can one philosophize without intelligence?).
But anyway. I'm really not enjoying the book. The main character, Zarathustra, who I assume is largely a mirror of Nietzsche, spends all his time preaching how people need to stop being ignorant and think of original things like he does. And then he moans and complains about how he is so lonely because he’s a genius. Why don’t you come down from your freaking mountain top, stop preaching, and get over yourself if you’re so freaking emo, Zarathustra? And, I am annoyed by Zarathustra’s obvious lack of respect for women. He called them stupid; he said they were only good for loving blindly and being playthings for men. BAH!
Occasionally, at the beginning of one of his little stories, I think that it is going to be good. A few times, he reminds me of Whitman (whom I love), but he always ultimately differs drastically from Whitman because in some way, he is always criticizing someone (where as Whitman believes in inter-connectedness and improvement through advice... and stuff).
I swear, I’m trying to like it. I really am. I’m trying to be open minded and receptive to his beliefs. I’ve found a few that I think are clever/moral/good, but not very many. Honestly, I don’t want to finish. I’m a little bummed, I guess my first major foray into philosophy isn’t much of a success.
Second Half
Okay, it got better. He lightened up. He stopped being emo. He became a bit less condescending, and started giving advice without attaching huge insults. He encouraged learning, and self-love, and limited selfishness, and change. He actually started to really remind me of Whitman. I was able to read happily and enjoy it.
I don’t get how this book was at all associated with the Nazis. Seeing as they all were uber-Christian and Nietzsche is essentially agnostic/making up his own religion. I think it would be interesting to read the Nazi-fied version.
One of my favorite philosophies in the book was that people should be “good” not to get anything, but simply because. It reminded me of the story from Looking from Alaska that Pudge reads about. In the story, a woman runs through the streets with a torch and a bucket of water, claiming she will put out the fires of hell and destroy heaven so that people will be good for the sake of being good rather than to get a reward/avoid a punishment. I like that story. I’ve always believed in that.
I know this is all over the place, but I’m going to be disorganized some more:
*I like the idea of the superman/overman/great man. It is a similar theory to Atlas Shrugged: that all men are not equal; rather, some are superior because of hard work and skill.
*I still don’t like how condescending Nietzsche can be.
*I still think Zarathustra should just take a few Prozac or a lexapro
*I think the idea of God being dead is interesting. However, I think that even if God were “dead” it wouldn’t matter. People would still act more or less the same, and just worship idealized versions of people (kind of like how Zarathustra’s disciples worship him because they think he’s so great)
So… better than I thought at first. Thank God. Now onto the fun brain book!
Total Count: 14
Nonfiction: 5? Does Philosophy count as NonFic?
Nietzsche is freaking full of himself. I suppose, to be a philosopher, you sort of have to be. You need to believe that your ideas are right, and thus, that you are clever for think about them (unless your philosophy is that no one is smart, which would be contradictory; how can one philosophize without intelligence?).
But anyway. I'm really not enjoying the book. The main character, Zarathustra, who I assume is largely a mirror of Nietzsche, spends all his time preaching how people need to stop being ignorant and think of original things like he does. And then he moans and complains about how he is so lonely because he’s a genius. Why don’t you come down from your freaking mountain top, stop preaching, and get over yourself if you’re so freaking emo, Zarathustra? And, I am annoyed by Zarathustra’s obvious lack of respect for women. He called them stupid; he said they were only good for loving blindly and being playthings for men. BAH!
Occasionally, at the beginning of one of his little stories, I think that it is going to be good. A few times, he reminds me of Whitman (whom I love), but he always ultimately differs drastically from Whitman because in some way, he is always criticizing someone (where as Whitman believes in inter-connectedness and improvement through advice... and stuff).
I swear, I’m trying to like it. I really am. I’m trying to be open minded and receptive to his beliefs. I’ve found a few that I think are clever/moral/good, but not very many. Honestly, I don’t want to finish. I’m a little bummed, I guess my first major foray into philosophy isn’t much of a success.
Second Half
Okay, it got better. He lightened up. He stopped being emo. He became a bit less condescending, and started giving advice without attaching huge insults. He encouraged learning, and self-love, and limited selfishness, and change. He actually started to really remind me of Whitman. I was able to read happily and enjoy it.
I don’t get how this book was at all associated with the Nazis. Seeing as they all were uber-Christian and Nietzsche is essentially agnostic/making up his own religion. I think it would be interesting to read the Nazi-fied version.
One of my favorite philosophies in the book was that people should be “good” not to get anything, but simply because. It reminded me of the story from Looking from Alaska that Pudge reads about. In the story, a woman runs through the streets with a torch and a bucket of water, claiming she will put out the fires of hell and destroy heaven so that people will be good for the sake of being good rather than to get a reward/avoid a punishment. I like that story. I’ve always believed in that.
I know this is all over the place, but I’m going to be disorganized some more:
*I like the idea of the superman/overman/great man. It is a similar theory to Atlas Shrugged: that all men are not equal; rather, some are superior because of hard work and skill.
*I still don’t like how condescending Nietzsche can be.
*I still think Zarathustra should just take a few Prozac or a lexapro
*I think the idea of God being dead is interesting. However, I think that even if God were “dead” it wouldn’t matter. People would still act more or less the same, and just worship idealized versions of people (kind of like how Zarathustra’s disciples worship him because they think he’s so great)
So… better than I thought at first. Thank God. Now onto the fun brain book!
Total Count: 14
Nonfiction: 5? Does Philosophy count as NonFic?
YAFic for a Break
I opted for a slightly lighter read after Atlas Shrugged (which I’m still thinking about; it was that good). The Love Curse of the Rumbaughs by Jack Gantos was lighter in that it was a young adult novel, but really not all that light. The book tells the story of a girl with a curse that causes her to love her mother obsessively. Her neighbors, the two odd Rumbaugh twins (one of whom is actually her father), also had the curse and actually performed taxidermy on their own mother to keep her ‘alive’.
The book was weird, to say the least. It was also surprisingly well written, in terms of vocabulary and sentence structure. However, after reading Atlas Shrugged, tLCotR seemed too short and under-developed. Still, it was a good YA novel. A little gothic, a little creepy, a little below my reading level, but still pretty good. 7/10.
January 10th is Alaska Young Day; so of course, I had to reread Looking for Alaska by John Green. It was my third time reading it, and I loved it just as much, if not more, than I had before. There are soooo many great lines, and the overall message is both complex and amazing. Plus, as I read, I can hear John’s voice in my head.
I didn’t cry this time; I suppose because some of the emotion has worn off since my earlier reads. But, I still felt a little teary. I loved Alaska, although she was certainly a flawed character. She reminds me a bit of myself: her complexity, her love of books, her secrets. I find myself wishing I was as cool as her, yet I sometimes question myself. Yes, she was cool, but she was also tortured, and unfair, and unpredictable. I love her, but I think I only love part of her, or the idea of her, just like Pudge.
I really think that Looking for Alaska may be my favorite YA novel of all time. I think that I’ll make it a tradition to reread it every year on January 10th. Ironically, January tenth, the day that before changed to after, is also my half birthday. So her anniversary coincides with the opposite of my own. I guess I just find that interesting. 9.5/10
I'm finishing up Thus Spoke Zarathustra today. It was recommended to me by a friend, and the juries still out. I think that philosophy books should be studied, not read like novels, so I guess I'm kind of doing it wrong. But I really want to finish, so that I can move onto The Accidental Mind, a book about brain science that looks awesome. I read the intro, and can't wait to continue. It will probably be tomorrow's book. Then, I have a few other brain-science books and one physics books on my list. Plus, I have to review A Tale of Two Cities and Macbeth for English class (woot.)
Total Book Count: 13
Total Nonfiction: 4 (30.7%, I'm slacking, I know)
Number of Books Currently Sitting Next to my Bedside Table: 6
The book was weird, to say the least. It was also surprisingly well written, in terms of vocabulary and sentence structure. However, after reading Atlas Shrugged, tLCotR seemed too short and under-developed. Still, it was a good YA novel. A little gothic, a little creepy, a little below my reading level, but still pretty good. 7/10.
January 10th is Alaska Young Day; so of course, I had to reread Looking for Alaska by John Green. It was my third time reading it, and I loved it just as much, if not more, than I had before. There are soooo many great lines, and the overall message is both complex and amazing. Plus, as I read, I can hear John’s voice in my head.
I didn’t cry this time; I suppose because some of the emotion has worn off since my earlier reads. But, I still felt a little teary. I loved Alaska, although she was certainly a flawed character. She reminds me a bit of myself: her complexity, her love of books, her secrets. I find myself wishing I was as cool as her, yet I sometimes question myself. Yes, she was cool, but she was also tortured, and unfair, and unpredictable. I love her, but I think I only love part of her, or the idea of her, just like Pudge.
I really think that Looking for Alaska may be my favorite YA novel of all time. I think that I’ll make it a tradition to reread it every year on January 10th. Ironically, January tenth, the day that before changed to after, is also my half birthday. So her anniversary coincides with the opposite of my own. I guess I just find that interesting. 9.5/10
I'm finishing up Thus Spoke Zarathustra today. It was recommended to me by a friend, and the juries still out. I think that philosophy books should be studied, not read like novels, so I guess I'm kind of doing it wrong. But I really want to finish, so that I can move onto The Accidental Mind, a book about brain science that looks awesome. I read the intro, and can't wait to continue. It will probably be tomorrow's book. Then, I have a few other brain-science books and one physics books on my list. Plus, I have to review A Tale of Two Cities and Macbeth for English class (woot.)
Total Book Count: 13
Total Nonfiction: 4 (30.7%, I'm slacking, I know)
Number of Books Currently Sitting Next to my Bedside Table: 6
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Atlas Shrugged
I finished Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand at about 6 last night. I'm feeling pretty proud of myself right now. It's over 1000 pages, and the font is tiny. I basically sat in bed and read all day, but I finished it. I'm pretty sure it's a record for me. The leg cramps and pins and needles both sucked, but it was worth it, because Atlas Shrugged was amazing. I should read really long books more often- there's just so much more room for a plot and characters to develop. I felt like I really got a pretty full idea of the different characters (except for the ones that were intentionally left mysterious). Most of the books I read are 200-350 pages. I think by keeping track of the number of books I read, I'm tempted to pick shorter books so that my count keeps rising. I remember my Creative Writing teacher warning me about that in 9th grade. He told me that I shouldn't keep track of books because it put pressure on me to read too quickly or read only a narrow group of books. I guess he was right, to an extent. That being said, I don't think that I'll stop keeping track. I didn't give myself a goal to hit this year for that reason. I don't want to be pressured. I am actually planning on not beating 155 from last year. I feel like if I keep beating the previous year's count, I'll feel obligated to read more, and more, and more, until it's not fun anymore.
So anyway, Atlas Shrugged.
It was soooo good. Definitely one of my favorite books of all time. I liked and cared about all of the main characters (except, or course, the antagonists, who Rand easily made me dislike).
I don't know that I necessarily agree with all of the philosophies in the book. The basic summary is that the "thinkers" of the world (the smart men/women who make the world what it is) remove themselves from society in protest of the corruption of the "looters". It is then shown that the world falls apart without them. The message is largely against socialism. The novel demonstrates that all people cannot be equal, and socialism (and the destruction of competition and capitalism) leads to destruction and chaos.
I have never been a huge fan of socialism. I think that if one works harder, one deserves to be more successful than one who does not work as hard. I believe in competition. I believe that someone has to lose, so that everyone can learn. I don't usually pity the poor, because I think that if they choose to work, they can succeed (although yes, it may be harder).
That being said, the main axiom of the thinkers of the world is that they choose to look after their own interests and live for themselves, not for any other man. I think that while they say this, and follow it to an extent, it is not entirely true,. I think that one can help others and support others and live for other while also pursuing one's own interests and values. No extreme is correct. There has to be a meshing of working for oneself and working for others. I think Eddie Willers represents the happy medium. He is obviously the most moral man in the book, although also one of the least developed central characters. He looks after his own interest, to an extent, while also educating others (specifically John Galt) about the goings-on of the world. I found it interesting that Rand chose to leave Willers, the character most people can probably relate to, in an unresolved situation.
I know that I've read another book in which the great men of the world are in a detached utopia setting. I just don't know what book it was. It's really going to bother me.
I also loved that I could relate what I've learned in history to the book. There were a few quotes by Gilded Age millionaires ("The public be damned!") that I recognized and obvious Cold War references and references to political socialist groups. I love feeling educated.
Also, I had expected the style of the book to be more... unnecessarily complex? Verbose? Difficult? I don't know. I guess I just expected it to be a lot harder to get through. It wasn't It was really an easy read, once I got used to the small print and stopped thinking about how long it was. I couldn't have finished a dull book that quickly. 9.5/10
Books this Year: 11
Nonfiction: 4 (36%)
So anyway, Atlas Shrugged.
It was soooo good. Definitely one of my favorite books of all time. I liked and cared about all of the main characters (except, or course, the antagonists, who Rand easily made me dislike).
I don't know that I necessarily agree with all of the philosophies in the book. The basic summary is that the "thinkers" of the world (the smart men/women who make the world what it is) remove themselves from society in protest of the corruption of the "looters". It is then shown that the world falls apart without them. The message is largely against socialism. The novel demonstrates that all people cannot be equal, and socialism (and the destruction of competition and capitalism) leads to destruction and chaos.
I have never been a huge fan of socialism. I think that if one works harder, one deserves to be more successful than one who does not work as hard. I believe in competition. I believe that someone has to lose, so that everyone can learn. I don't usually pity the poor, because I think that if they choose to work, they can succeed (although yes, it may be harder).
That being said, the main axiom of the thinkers of the world is that they choose to look after their own interests and live for themselves, not for any other man. I think that while they say this, and follow it to an extent, it is not entirely true,. I think that one can help others and support others and live for other while also pursuing one's own interests and values. No extreme is correct. There has to be a meshing of working for oneself and working for others. I think Eddie Willers represents the happy medium. He is obviously the most moral man in the book, although also one of the least developed central characters. He looks after his own interest, to an extent, while also educating others (specifically John Galt) about the goings-on of the world. I found it interesting that Rand chose to leave Willers, the character most people can probably relate to, in an unresolved situation.
I know that I've read another book in which the great men of the world are in a detached utopia setting. I just don't know what book it was. It's really going to bother me.
I also loved that I could relate what I've learned in history to the book. There were a few quotes by Gilded Age millionaires ("The public be damned!") that I recognized and obvious Cold War references and references to political socialist groups. I love feeling educated.
Also, I had expected the style of the book to be more... unnecessarily complex? Verbose? Difficult? I don't know. I guess I just expected it to be a lot harder to get through. It wasn't It was really an easy read, once I got used to the small print and stopped thinking about how long it was. I couldn't have finished a dull book that quickly. 9.5/10
Books this Year: 11
Nonfiction: 4 (36%)
Friday, January 8, 2010
Plays, YAFic, and Science-y Nonfic
I shall forgo the introduction and launch right in, as I am about to run out the door.
An Enemy of the People by Henrik Ibsen was excellent. It was adapted by Arthur Miller, simply to make it more American, but it still had a distinctly Ibsen-voice (I love Ibsen and Miller, btw.) In the play, a prominent doctor discovers that the water of the town's famous springs is contaminated. However, his brother, the mayor, does not want the public to know because it will be too expensive to purify the springs. So, he essentially ruins his brother and encourages the public to deem the doctor crazy.
The play did an excellent job of portraying how sometimes, it is more comfortable to ignore the truth. It also revealed other things about human nature, such as how people will throw even their own kin under the bus in order to save themselves. I became emotionally involved in the book from the get-go. I was furiously angry at some points, and highly sympathetic at others. I read it easily in one sitting, thoroughly enjoying it. 8.5/10
One Whole and Perfect Day by Judith Clark was less of a pleasure to read. For the first hundred pages or so, I didn’t think that I would finish. All of the characters were vapid, shallow, or annoying, and I just couldn’t get into it. In order to like a book, I have to like the characters (or at least be interested in them). OWaPD was similar to some Jodi Piccoult books in that it switched point of view constantly. Clark did not execute this fabulously. The story mainly focuses around Lily, a mature 16-year-old girl and her immature college-aged brother, Lonnie. However, neither character is well developed, and neither one is likeable.
I was honestly disappointed. It won a Printz, and I had expected it to be good (as Printz’s usually are). I think the problem is I’m outgrowing YA Fiction. I’m sick of poor vocabulary, boring plots, and young/naïve characters. The second half was better than the first, but not by much. 5/10
The Secret Family by David Bodanis was very interesting. It was basically a composite of scientific facts related to the typical family (in this case, a mother, father, 14 year old girl, and a ten-year-old boy). The facts were interesting, although some seemed out of place. Overall however, I felt that I learned a lot of relevant things. The book also highlights some of the reasons why females are the genetically superior sex, which was fun to read J. I would definitely recommend it. Although I had expected it to be more about neurology that human biology, I enjoyed it anyway. 8/10
I'm now reading a signifigantly longer book, so I will probably not finish a book in a day for the first time so far this year. Oh darn it.
Total Books: 10
Total NonFiction: 4 (40%)
An Enemy of the People by Henrik Ibsen was excellent. It was adapted by Arthur Miller, simply to make it more American, but it still had a distinctly Ibsen-voice (I love Ibsen and Miller, btw.) In the play, a prominent doctor discovers that the water of the town's famous springs is contaminated. However, his brother, the mayor, does not want the public to know because it will be too expensive to purify the springs. So, he essentially ruins his brother and encourages the public to deem the doctor crazy.
The play did an excellent job of portraying how sometimes, it is more comfortable to ignore the truth. It also revealed other things about human nature, such as how people will throw even their own kin under the bus in order to save themselves. I became emotionally involved in the book from the get-go. I was furiously angry at some points, and highly sympathetic at others. I read it easily in one sitting, thoroughly enjoying it. 8.5/10
One Whole and Perfect Day by Judith Clark was less of a pleasure to read. For the first hundred pages or so, I didn’t think that I would finish. All of the characters were vapid, shallow, or annoying, and I just couldn’t get into it. In order to like a book, I have to like the characters (or at least be interested in them). OWaPD was similar to some Jodi Piccoult books in that it switched point of view constantly. Clark did not execute this fabulously. The story mainly focuses around Lily, a mature 16-year-old girl and her immature college-aged brother, Lonnie. However, neither character is well developed, and neither one is likeable.
I was honestly disappointed. It won a Printz, and I had expected it to be good (as Printz’s usually are). I think the problem is I’m outgrowing YA Fiction. I’m sick of poor vocabulary, boring plots, and young/naïve characters. The second half was better than the first, but not by much. 5/10
The Secret Family by David Bodanis was very interesting. It was basically a composite of scientific facts related to the typical family (in this case, a mother, father, 14 year old girl, and a ten-year-old boy). The facts were interesting, although some seemed out of place. Overall however, I felt that I learned a lot of relevant things. The book also highlights some of the reasons why females are the genetically superior sex, which was fun to read J. I would definitely recommend it. Although I had expected it to be more about neurology that human biology, I enjoyed it anyway. 8/10
I'm now reading a signifigantly longer book, so I will probably not finish a book in a day for the first time so far this year. Oh darn it.
Total Books: 10
Total NonFiction: 4 (40%)
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Memoirs, Macbeth, and Library Books
I finished A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by Dave Eggers last night, as expected. It did not get any better.
I think the major issue is that I just don't like memoirs. I think that anytime someone chooses to spend 500 pages talking about themself, it is going to sound self-indulgent. Yeah, Eggers life was hard, he was witty, he went through a lot, but jeez, no need to be such a drama queen. For most of the book, I really wanted him to just get over himself. I've been through shit. I've been through almost as much shit as he has. I know people who have died. I've lost close friends. I've had to take care of people whom I shouldn't have been responsible for. And I've done it all without ending up an immature douche-bag.
And I don't feel the need to declare it to the entire world in a novel.
Just sayin'.
4/10
I also just finished Macbeth. It was okay. Once again, Shakespeare is good, but not thrilling to me. He never intended for his plays to be read (he didn't even print them during his lifetime) because he thought that they were only half as meaningful without the acting. Maybe I just need to start seeing plays more.
That being said, I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more than AHWoSG. It was dark and tragic and kind of cool. Plus, I'm realizing that Shakespeare is a lot better if you're not a pretentious 7th grader trying to look impressive (I was about 12 when I read a lot of plays for the first time. I was kidding myself when I claimed I understood them). Thus far, I think Macbeth is my favorite tragedy. That being said, I really really really need to read Hamlet again (it was one of the 7th grade plays).
We're reading Macbeth for English in school, and we're watching the Roman Polanski version as well. It is a pretty faithful adaptation, though it annoyed me that none of the actors could post on horseback, which just looks absurd to me now.
Oh, Midwest. You've given me so much knowledge.
EDIT: So I ended up reading Macbeth 7 times in order to prepare for the test (which was supposed to be really hard). I got a 98. I also realized that I really really liked it. I read some analysis of it, a few critical essays, and also talked about it in class. I find that I always like books more when I study/discuss them rather tan just reading them. So, I like Macbeth a lot more now. God, I love being in English class. It makes books so much better.
7/10
Good news, the 6 books I had on hold at the library arrived. WOOT!
Total Books this Year: 7
Total NonFic: 3 (43%)
I think the major issue is that I just don't like memoirs. I think that anytime someone chooses to spend 500 pages talking about themself, it is going to sound self-indulgent. Yeah, Eggers life was hard, he was witty, he went through a lot, but jeez, no need to be such a drama queen. For most of the book, I really wanted him to just get over himself. I've been through shit. I've been through almost as much shit as he has. I know people who have died. I've lost close friends. I've had to take care of people whom I shouldn't have been responsible for. And I've done it all without ending up an immature douche-bag.
And I don't feel the need to declare it to the entire world in a novel.
Just sayin'.
4/10
I also just finished Macbeth. It was okay. Once again, Shakespeare is good, but not thrilling to me. He never intended for his plays to be read (he didn't even print them during his lifetime) because he thought that they were only half as meaningful without the acting. Maybe I just need to start seeing plays more.
That being said, I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more than AHWoSG. It was dark and tragic and kind of cool. Plus, I'm realizing that Shakespeare is a lot better if you're not a pretentious 7th grader trying to look impressive (I was about 12 when I read a lot of plays for the first time. I was kidding myself when I claimed I understood them). Thus far, I think Macbeth is my favorite tragedy. That being said, I really really really need to read Hamlet again (it was one of the 7th grade plays).
We're reading Macbeth for English in school, and we're watching the Roman Polanski version as well. It is a pretty faithful adaptation, though it annoyed me that none of the actors could post on horseback, which just looks absurd to me now.
Oh, Midwest. You've given me so much knowledge.
EDIT: So I ended up reading Macbeth 7 times in order to prepare for the test (which was supposed to be really hard). I got a 98. I also realized that I really really liked it. I read some analysis of it, a few critical essays, and also talked about it in class. I find that I always like books more when I study/discuss them rather tan just reading them. So, I like Macbeth a lot more now. God, I love being in English class. It makes books so much better.
7/10
Good news, the 6 books I had on hold at the library arrived. WOOT!
Total Books this Year: 7
Total NonFic: 3 (43%)
Monday, January 4, 2010
And the Flow Starts to Ebb...
Alas, school has started again, and I can't hope of keeping up with 1.5 books a day. It was fun while it lasted, kids, but now I've got to do some schoolwork too.
I finished Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson yesterday, but too late to get up and blog about it. So here it goes.
It wasn't what I expected. I mean, the story line was, the plot was (who doesn't know the story of Jekyll and Hyde), but the language and style wasn't. I read Kidnapped by Stevenson in 7th grade, and member really disliking it because of the language the Stevenson used. I sort of expected to have to suffer through DJaMH. It was happily surprised. It was not overly verbose or unnecessarily complex. The sentences were long when necessary, short when appropriate, and generally flowed nicely. That being said, it wasn't an amazing book. I suppose I'm not into gothic-style, science-y fiction. It is very short, so I didn't get bored, per se, but I certainly wasn't enthralled. It took me several sittings to finish it, as I kept putting it down to play my uke or work on some last minute homework.
Also, I thought the last half of the book was a bit of a quick fix /cop out. The first part is comprised largely of dialogue and first person observations by the narrator. The last several chapters, however, are all in the form of explanatory letters. No conversation, no observation, just paragraph after paragraph of explaining, explaining, explaining. Read it, I suppose, if you don't know the story. It's too popular to ignore. But don't expect to be on the edge of your seat, engrossed in an amazing thriller. 6/10.
I'm now reading A Heart Breaking Work of A Staggering Genius by Dave Eggars. It was a NYT bestselling memoir, and was nominated for a pulitzer, but so far I'm pretty unimpressed. Hopefully it suddenly becomes amazing in the last 100 pages. I'll probably finish it tonight, but I doubt I'll write about it. So Adiea until tomorrow.
Total Book Count- 5
NonFiction Count- 2 (40%)
I finished Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson yesterday, but too late to get up and blog about it. So here it goes.
It wasn't what I expected. I mean, the story line was, the plot was (who doesn't know the story of Jekyll and Hyde), but the language and style wasn't. I read Kidnapped by Stevenson in 7th grade, and member really disliking it because of the language the Stevenson used. I sort of expected to have to suffer through DJaMH. It was happily surprised. It was not overly verbose or unnecessarily complex. The sentences were long when necessary, short when appropriate, and generally flowed nicely. That being said, it wasn't an amazing book. I suppose I'm not into gothic-style, science-y fiction. It is very short, so I didn't get bored, per se, but I certainly wasn't enthralled. It took me several sittings to finish it, as I kept putting it down to play my uke or work on some last minute homework.
Also, I thought the last half of the book was a bit of a quick fix /cop out. The first part is comprised largely of dialogue and first person observations by the narrator. The last several chapters, however, are all in the form of explanatory letters. No conversation, no observation, just paragraph after paragraph of explaining, explaining, explaining. Read it, I suppose, if you don't know the story. It's too popular to ignore. But don't expect to be on the edge of your seat, engrossed in an amazing thriller. 6/10.
I'm now reading A Heart Breaking Work of A Staggering Genius by Dave Eggars. It was a NYT bestselling memoir, and was nominated for a pulitzer, but so far I'm pretty unimpressed. Hopefully it suddenly becomes amazing in the last 100 pages. I'll probably finish it tonight, but I doubt I'll write about it. So Adiea until tomorrow.
Total Book Count- 5
NonFiction Count- 2 (40%)
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Being a Prince, Impersonating a Man, and Mistaking Your Own Wife for a Hat
I'm already slacking on this thing, and it's only the third day of the year. I'm three books behind! To update:
The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli on 1-1-2010
Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare on 1-2-2010
The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales by Oliver Sacks on 1-3-2010.
So at least I haven't been slacking on actually reading.
The Prince was good, though different that I expected. Apparently, it has been severely misquoted and misconstrued over the years. It is not a book about being cruel, or evil, or ruthless. It is a book about ruling as a prince, and ruling well. Machiavelli does not advocate cruelty. In fact, he explicitly makes an argument against useless cruelty and harshness. That being said, he advocates that it is better to be feared than loved, because fear is more stable. However, whenever both emotional responses are possible, he advise one to obtain them. Also, his most oft repeated advice is to avoid being hated.
Overall, I thought the book was really interesting. I'm certainly glad I read it, as I had a completely incorrect preconceived notion about it. That being said, i felt I couldn't follow some of Machiavelli's points because I did not have the historical knowledge. In each chapter, Machiavelli would first argue his opinion, giving advice, and then give both a "present day" and ancient example. I really enjoyed reading the arguments, but sometimes became lost with the examples due to the fact that i have studied very little world history. Overall, I'd rate the book a 6. Machiavelli's ideas were solid, well organized, and well supported. At times, things were mildly monotonous (though they couldn't get too monotonous over only 154 pages), but for the most part, I was not bored.
Next, I read (or rather listened to) Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare. Try as I may, I am not a hardcore Shakespeare fan. I appreciated most of his plays, but I've never been able to love them. That being said, Twelfth Night is one of my favorite Shakespeare plays to date, falling slightly behind Merchant of Venice. It is funny, clever, and well organized. I was never confused (which is saying something, as audio books are often hard to follow in play form if you don't get the voices memorized quickly), and I really enjoyed it. I think that I prefer Shakespeare's comedies over his tragedies. His characters are less dramatic and vapid, and the entire thing reads less like a soap opera and more like a sitcom (I've never been a soap opera kind of girl). Also, I loved that there was a strong female character in this play. I know that Shakespeare often has strong females in his plays (like Lady Macbeth and Ophelia, obviously), but I felt that Viola and Olivia were more relatable that the typical Shakespeare female. Overall, 6 out of 10.
Finally, I read The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales by Oliver Sacks. I must say, it was excellent. It is probably my favorite nonfiction book of all time, and beats out many of my favorite fiction books as well. As the title suggest, TMwMhWfaHaOCT (how's that for an initialism?) is a compilation of clinical tales related to neurology. I have been interested in neuroscience for some time, and this got me even more excited about the subject. The book is split into four sections: deficits/losses, excesses, reminiscence/transports, and mental retardation. All sections were equally captivating. Sacks, a practicing neurologist, told stories of patients with various neurological disorders while simply explaining the science behind them. The book was humorous, clever, and well-executed.
I apparently have insomnia once again. I tried to go to sleep at 10, as I'm trying to prepare for having o get up at 5 am again once school starts tomorrow, but couldn't sleep at all. At around one, I pulled out this book and finished in by about 2:30. I laughed aloud on a few occasions, and was brought nearly to tears on another. While some of the neurological problems described are quite funny, they are, in reality, quite tragic.
In addition to the wonderful information that Sacks presents from his own studies, he also references the work of other neurologists and great thinkers who have done research. I am looking forward to going through the bibliography of his book and reading many of the books mentioned.
Granted, I only got 2 hours of sleep, possibly because of this book, but it was worth it. Before writing this blog, i spent an hour looking up colleges that offer neuroscience majors. I had been considering psychiatry, but neurology now seems so much more endearing. 9.5/10.
Total Book Count for 2010: 4
Nonfiction Count: 2 (50%)
The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli on 1-1-2010
Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare on 1-2-2010
The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales by Oliver Sacks on 1-3-2010.
So at least I haven't been slacking on actually reading.
The Prince was good, though different that I expected. Apparently, it has been severely misquoted and misconstrued over the years. It is not a book about being cruel, or evil, or ruthless. It is a book about ruling as a prince, and ruling well. Machiavelli does not advocate cruelty. In fact, he explicitly makes an argument against useless cruelty and harshness. That being said, he advocates that it is better to be feared than loved, because fear is more stable. However, whenever both emotional responses are possible, he advise one to obtain them. Also, his most oft repeated advice is to avoid being hated.
Overall, I thought the book was really interesting. I'm certainly glad I read it, as I had a completely incorrect preconceived notion about it. That being said, i felt I couldn't follow some of Machiavelli's points because I did not have the historical knowledge. In each chapter, Machiavelli would first argue his opinion, giving advice, and then give both a "present day" and ancient example. I really enjoyed reading the arguments, but sometimes became lost with the examples due to the fact that i have studied very little world history. Overall, I'd rate the book a 6. Machiavelli's ideas were solid, well organized, and well supported. At times, things were mildly monotonous (though they couldn't get too monotonous over only 154 pages), but for the most part, I was not bored.
Next, I read (or rather listened to) Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare. Try as I may, I am not a hardcore Shakespeare fan. I appreciated most of his plays, but I've never been able to love them. That being said, Twelfth Night is one of my favorite Shakespeare plays to date, falling slightly behind Merchant of Venice. It is funny, clever, and well organized. I was never confused (which is saying something, as audio books are often hard to follow in play form if you don't get the voices memorized quickly), and I really enjoyed it. I think that I prefer Shakespeare's comedies over his tragedies. His characters are less dramatic and vapid, and the entire thing reads less like a soap opera and more like a sitcom (I've never been a soap opera kind of girl). Also, I loved that there was a strong female character in this play. I know that Shakespeare often has strong females in his plays (like Lady Macbeth and Ophelia, obviously), but I felt that Viola and Olivia were more relatable that the typical Shakespeare female. Overall, 6 out of 10.
Finally, I read The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales by Oliver Sacks. I must say, it was excellent. It is probably my favorite nonfiction book of all time, and beats out many of my favorite fiction books as well. As the title suggest, TMwMhWfaHaOCT (how's that for an initialism?) is a compilation of clinical tales related to neurology. I have been interested in neuroscience for some time, and this got me even more excited about the subject. The book is split into four sections: deficits/losses, excesses, reminiscence/transports, and mental retardation. All sections were equally captivating. Sacks, a practicing neurologist, told stories of patients with various neurological disorders while simply explaining the science behind them. The book was humorous, clever, and well-executed.
I apparently have insomnia once again. I tried to go to sleep at 10, as I'm trying to prepare for having o get up at 5 am again once school starts tomorrow, but couldn't sleep at all. At around one, I pulled out this book and finished in by about 2:30. I laughed aloud on a few occasions, and was brought nearly to tears on another. While some of the neurological problems described are quite funny, they are, in reality, quite tragic.
In addition to the wonderful information that Sacks presents from his own studies, he also references the work of other neurologists and great thinkers who have done research. I am looking forward to going through the bibliography of his book and reading many of the books mentioned.
Granted, I only got 2 hours of sleep, possibly because of this book, but it was worth it. Before writing this blog, i spent an hour looking up colleges that offer neuroscience majors. I had been considering psychiatry, but neurology now seems so much more endearing. 9.5/10.
Total Book Count for 2010: 4
Nonfiction Count: 2 (50%)
Friday, January 1, 2010
Sold by Patricia McCormick
First day of the new year and I've finished my first book-- Sold by Patricia McCormick. I went to the library yesterday, intending to spend a $25 dollar gift certificate on a list of books that had been recommended to me. I left with only this one, and a bit of a bad attitude. B&N apparently hadn't restocked since the holidays, and I couldn't find what I was looking for. In my frustration, I considered returning Sold, the only book I could find, to the shelf.
Thank God I didn't.
One of my resolutions this year was to read more nonfiction. With Sold, although it is a YA fiction book, I felt like I was reading a real account. McCormick tells the story of Lakshmi, a Nepali girl who has been sold into prostitution by her step-father. It was vivid, honest, and obviously well-researched. I read it in one sitting, unwilling to leave Lakshmi alone. Her confusion, sadness, fear, brief moments of happiness, and integrity in such a horrible situation seemed extremely accurate.
My only complaint was that the book was written in incremented semi-prose, so the 272 pages flew by like 100 pages. I've never been a huge fan of books like that; I like a full page of text to get my money's worth. However, I understand the purpose served by the writing style. It is short (sigh...) but too the point and succinct. McCormick artfully uses her style of writing to really show the feelings that young Lakshmi would have. Sold is written from Lakshmi's point of view, so it is an accurate style, though still not my favorite aspect of the book.
I would certainly recommend it, though it doesn't quite crack my list of favorite YA novels.
7.5/10
Thank God I didn't.
One of my resolutions this year was to read more nonfiction. With Sold, although it is a YA fiction book, I felt like I was reading a real account. McCormick tells the story of Lakshmi, a Nepali girl who has been sold into prostitution by her step-father. It was vivid, honest, and obviously well-researched. I read it in one sitting, unwilling to leave Lakshmi alone. Her confusion, sadness, fear, brief moments of happiness, and integrity in such a horrible situation seemed extremely accurate.
My only complaint was that the book was written in incremented semi-prose, so the 272 pages flew by like 100 pages. I've never been a huge fan of books like that; I like a full page of text to get my money's worth. However, I understand the purpose served by the writing style. It is short (sigh...) but too the point and succinct. McCormick artfully uses her style of writing to really show the feelings that young Lakshmi would have. Sold is written from Lakshmi's point of view, so it is an accurate style, though still not my favorite aspect of the book.
I would certainly recommend it, though it doesn't quite crack my list of favorite YA novels.
7.5/10
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
