Oh Hai, I'm back.

So that was certainly the longest hiatus I've ever taken from this blog. But I was busy enjoying my summer, getting ready for college, moving into college, doing the whole college thing, and generally not reading all that much. Oops. Since I last wrote, I have at least read some books. Woot?

I Am the Messenger

The Kite Runner

Napoleon's Buttons

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

The Duchess of Padua

How Reading Changed My Life

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

Twilight (don't judge)

New Moon (don't judge)

Eclipse (don't judge)

Breaking Dawn (don't judge)

Musicophilia

Reality is Broken

The Help

Superfreakonomics

I really did like quite a few of them... though honestly it's been a while now since I read them. I’ll see what I can recall.

I Am the Messenger- This is quite possibly one of my favorite Young Adult novels. It’s one that I always recommend to others when they want a nice, easy read that also has some substance to it. Essentially, the main character is an atypical, Joe-Shmo hero. He receives cards in the mail that direct him towards tasks to help other people or learn about himself. It’s an impressive book… and it makes one wonder about what a person is capable of. Plus it’s bust-out-laughing funny at times. Oh, and the author is ridiculously attractive. And Australian.

The Kite Runner- I reread it for school. I liked it a lot more than the last time I read it, which was during my road trip to Arizona in 2008. It didn’t feel so minority-centered (as in, it felt like the plot was about more than focusing on one specific group, which is what I felt reading it the first time). I enjoyed it. And some of the history that I learned along with it actually came in handy this week at Penn. I had a conversation with someone about Farsi, and I’m only really familiar with the origin of the language because of this book.

Napoleon’s Buttons- Hands down, favorite nonfiction book ever. Like, it was really, really good. My Chemistry teacher gave it to me as a gift at the Top 10 Dinner at my school. And I absolutely loved it. It provides interesting history/science related to 17 molecules/compounds/chemical classes that changed history. And it’s beautifully written. I particularly enjoyed the chapters about antibiotics and nitrates.

A Tree Grows in Brooklyn- I had been meaning to read this book since about 4^th grade, when I first heard it mentioned in “Here’s to You, Rachel Robinson” by Judy Blume. It’s sweet, and interesting, and reminds me of the books I used to love as a child. Books about strong girls, who lived a long time ago. I almost wish I had brought it with me to college. It’s sweet and inspirational, and certainly a book I could read again and again. And a book that I hope to read to my daughter, if I have one.

The Duchess of Padua- I really do love Oscar Wilde’s plays. And this one was amusing. It was a bit like Romeo and Juliet meets Cyrano de Bergerac. Same general time period. And some sort of hilariously cheesy quotes. Plus, it was a wicked fast read.

How Reading Changed My Life- This was a graduation present. And it was honestly just okay. But it had some great recommended book lists in the back. Which I really appreciated. I have a much longer must-read list now.

Harry Potter- Do I even have to say?

The Twilight Series- I needed something easy, to get me reading again in the summer, okay? I know they’re not good books. But they’re good at being what they’re supposed to be- Potato chip reads. No real value, but slightly tasty. And even if Bella is a horrible role model for girls, I still like this series well enough.

Musicophila- I was so disappointed by this book. I usually love Oliver Sacks’s work. But this was painful to get through. It was too repetitive and not interesting. I honestly think it took me three months to finish.

Reality is Broken- This was the Penn Reading Project book. So I got to see a talk with the author and have a small discussion about it. The general response to the book at Penn was negative. But I liked it. It’s about how games can help us feel better and be more productive. Which I totally agree with. Well-designed games can be motivated, educational, and both life and world changing. I use games to study, but I could definitely see broader implications than that.

The Help- It was really good, like everyone said. And I felt like I could really identify with the main white female character. In terms of her self-esteem, desire to write, and ultimate goals. And I thought this was an excellent “race novel.” Because it didn’t read like a sob story or a pity story. It just felt very real, and not forced.

Superfreakonimcs- Super freaking funny. Though I feel like it’s more about sociology than Econ. I really want to read Freakonomics now too. Also… this was a required book for my program at UPenn. About a quarter of the program is made up of Indian guys… there was a section in the book about how on average, Indian guys have the smallest penises, which is why the condom success rate is low in India. Because the condoms are just too big for the guys. I can’t imagine how awkward every Indian Vagelos kid felt while reading that….

So I kind of caught up. I’ll hopefully try to start reading more and also writing more. I don’t know if I’ll hit 100 books this year… but hopefully I can at least get close.

Total Book Count: 36

NonFic: 6

New Layout (I'M WORKING ON IT) and Holla! At my Homeboys

So yeah.... I'm working on the layout. I think the upper banner (which is brown, currently, to anyone who is reading this in a few days/weeks when it will likely be different) look amateurish and pixel-y. And plus....brown is a kind of gross color. But I was trying to work around the picture of me in the attic full of books. So awkward brown it was.

But, I suppose, this is supposed to be a book blog above all else. So yeah. Othello by William Shakespeare, brought to you by my AP English class.

Throughout the play, the characters, especially Othello, frequently use the words "holla" and "ho." Which leads to some amusing English class discussions about how "gansta" Othello is. But really, I think that it gets more attention than it usually would simply because Othello is basically the only black Shakespeare character. I think it's somewhat unfortunate that this play is often solely remembered for being the one "with a black guy." Because really, it's a decent play and it should be remembered for more than that by high school students.

Still though.... it's not my favorite. I really liked Iago, the evil, plotting villain in the play, but other than that, I didn't particularly like the rest of the characters.Othello was a jealous bore who jumped to conclusions too quickly (legit too quickly to be possible, see below). Desdemona was...boring and a stupid female. Although I do admire her loyalty to her husband to an extent. Emilia was probably the character I liked most after Iago. She at least had some substance to her. And I appreciated her take on how woman can be lustful and disloyal, just as men can. It was nice to hear, especially considering the time period.

The entire play takes place in the span of, at the most, three days. And that's if one generaously assumes that some of the days aren't touched on at all. So essentially, Desdemona is accused of cheating on Othello within 24 hours of their marriage, and killed within 24 hours after that.
There is no way that is possible. She simply wouldn't have time which is one of the things that makes this play so unbelievable. Even if Desdemona was one hell of a hour....damn. That'd be fast.
I can't imagine that Shakespeare could have seriously made such a grave error in the time scheme of his play. I mean.... it was kinda his job, and he's alleged to have been pretty good at it.
Maybe, some have suggested, in between Act III scenes iii and iv, Desdemona waited for over a week before interceding for Cassio to Othello. But this really wouldn't make sense, considering the urgency of what she had to say, and considering that no mention of this is made.
Another funny thing.... the war. It couldn't have possibly progressed so fast. It essentially went from fairly intense to over in 24 hours as well. I don't even know that ships could travel that quickly.
Also, Bianca (the whore) tells Cassio that he has been away from her for a week. So he would have had to have been in the city for at least a week.
Ack. Time makes my head hurt. Maybe all of these subtle inaccuracies and impossibilities were Shakespeare's way of saying, yes, time did elapse, you just weren't entirely savvy to where. In the larger scheme of things, it really doesn't matter, but it would have been Nice for Mr. William to make it a bit easier for us high school readers.

Total Book Count: 20 (I swear I'll start reading after AP tests)
NonFic: 2 (10%)

FOR NARNIA! And Russia....

I am a failure of a blogger, I know. I am lazy, often, and I have let this blog sit un-updated for a month.
So what spurred me to actually get my act together and blog today? My Russian reader. Yes, you. I get a notification every time you search "oomboo2.blogspot.com" on yandex.ru (don't worry it just tells me that a search was made, not who you actually are). And every time you, Russian blog reader, visit this and I haven't updated, I feel bad. Because I'm super flattered that you actually seek out my new posts. It makes me happy. So this post is for you. <3 
Привет! Спасибо Вам за заботу!


I was talking to a girl at my UPenn preview (oh yeah, did I mention I got into the University of Pennsylvania? The ivy... not Penn State.... not that there's anything wrong with Penn State.... I'm just clarifying.... because I'm going to UPenn... kthnxbye.) and she was talking about how everyone in her school is reverting back to middle-school drama in the face of college. Basically, Freudian style regression in addition to senioritis.
Although I haven't had any middle-school-esque drama, I've certainly been regressing somewhat.


I read the entire chronicles of Narnia series over the past month. I think I read them for the first time roughly 7 years ago, when I was in 5th grade. That's probably a little sad.


But, I do love these books. They make me happy and they remind me of happier times in my life when things were simpler and decisions were easy.


SO, my thoughts on the world of Narnia, split up by book*, then in general.


The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
This book is probably not my favorite in the series, but I like it solely because it's the first. And there's a certain amount of....sentimentalism associated with the first and the last book in the series.
I like meeting the characters, especially Lucy and Aslan, whom I love. Peter is....eh.... a little boring. And Edmund is just a loser in the first book. Susan I absolutely can't stand. In any of the books. She's such an uppity bitch. Gah.
Also, the fawn, Mr. Tumnus kind of reminds me of Hagrid from Harry Potter. I mean, Hagrid is always amazingly loyal while Tumnus is kind of a shmuck.... but I more so think that the reaction each character is supposed to illicit is similar. Everyone loves Hagrid, and I think Mr. Tumnus is supposed to be lovable as well. But like Hagrid, I cannot stand Tumnus. Annoying fawn.
The plot of this book, being the first, is probably the most simplistic because so much needs to be explained. So I don't adore the story, although I find it interesting. Perhaps excluding the last book, it has the most religious symbolism, which is always intriguing. Because Aslan=Jesus and he's sacrificed and stuff. I like that.


Prince Caspian
I love this book because of how it starts out- with young Prince Caspian, rather than the Pevensie children, secretly learning about Old Narnia. I like the concept of forgotten lands and folklore that comes true. I don't particularly like the battle scenes in this book as the seem a little cliche, although they do give Edmund a chance to redeem himself a bit (I tend to like Edmund more and more as the books go on). Mostly, I like the travels of the Pevensie children at Cair Paravel (their old castle) and the set-up story of Caspian.


The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
This book, I think is my favorite in the series. As I've always disliked Susan and I've never cared about Peter, I enjoyed having a break from them in this book. Lucy is adorable, Edmund is suddenly a...dude, and Eustace (their cousin) is amusingly obnoxious. I also think it's the most diverse story. Throughout the book, the group of children,  on board with Prince Caspian, venture out into the sea to find the lost Lords of Narnia. Every island that the group travels to has a new story, which keeps the book from ever dragging. And the idea of so many lost and forgotten stories and forgotten fates is interesting.


The Silver Chair
I'd like to take a moment to say that the sexism in this series is really evident, but then again, they were published in the middle of the century when sexism was more acceptable. The girls are never allowed to fight in the battles as they are deemed "too delicate" and several comments are made about how women are meant to be mothers and homemakers. It's annoying, but doesn't detract too much from the actual book. I just don't like the idea of impressionable children reading these books and thinking that women can't be strong.
I mention this under The Silver Chair because it's the first book that has a stronger and not simply adorable female character. Jill Pole, a friend of Edmund from the last book, still isn't exactly a strong heroine, but she at least isn't sweet and angelic like Lucy. She has some...spunk.
But really, Jane and Edmund are the only things I like about this book. The rest is...very juvenile and boring. I know it's a children's series, but I think that this book is more immature, boring, and fairy-tale like than the others.


The Horse and His Boy
Okay, I take it back, The Dawn Treader might not be my favorite. Or at least not by a lot. I like The Horse and His Boy because it's distinctly different than the other books in that it isn't centered in Narnia. Plus, there's a legit female badass in it, Aravis, who is an aristocrat-turned-runaway.
I like how this book kind of challenges ideas of superiority, as the main boy character Shasta, must learn that he's no better than his horse, Bree. Likewise, Aravis, who is super cocky in the beginning, must learn that she's not better than Shasta simply because she is wealthy.
This book reminds me a bit of some of Tamora Pierce's work. Tamora Pierce wrote a few series about girl warriors and night in a magical land called Tortall. In the Tortall series, there is a group of people called the Bahzir, who are the people of the dessert. The Horse and His Boy focuses mainly on the dessert people, the Calormen, who are not a part of Narnia (which is very similar to Pierce's Tortall). I thought that this parallel was interesting.


The Magician's Nephew
This book, I think, is the sweetest. I'm not sure actually why I mentally characterize it as sweet...but it just is. It's about two children, Diggory and Polly, sort of discovering/creating Narnia thanks to their somewhat evil (but more greedy and stupid) Uncle's magic. I think it's cool to read it second to last because suddenly, so much about Narnia begins to make sense. Because the reader finally understands the history of thinks like the lamppost where the Pevensies first enter Narnia. Also, it's cool to learn that Diggory Kirke, who is the main character in this book, is actually the uncle whom the Pevensie children live with in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. It brings all of the books together.


The Last Battle
Okay.... I didn't actually reread this one. Somehow, I got lazy and failed to finish rereading the series. But I swear, I'll read it soon and write up a blog post about it. I pinky promise.


Final Thoughts
All in all, I really do love this series. It makes me smile, and reminds me of my childhood, and allows me to get lost in a fantasy world. Sometimes I wish that there were fantasy books like this, sweet fantasy books about children, written for adults. Because I'd love to see a story this great written about at a higher level.
Recommended. For sure.


Total Book Count: 20
Total Nonfiction: 2 (10%)


*Note, I always read the Narnia series in the order that they were written in, not in chronological order, as they are marketed. C. S. Lewis always said that he thought they should be read as he wrote them. And I respect that. Plus, I think they're better that way.

Flamingly Liberal Aardvarks

Sometimes, I wish I had a real blog. By which I mean, a classic, turn-of-the-millennium style blog where I could just rant about my life. Like.... a livejournal. (Oh God... remember when everyone had a livejournal?) Because then, perhaps, I wouldn't go 3 weeks without making a post because I was down. Rather, I'd be making posts because I was down.

Instead, I have this, my book blog. On the bright side, however, this at least means that I have not become so self-centered that I explain my problems in excruciating details (and/or via obtuse poetry) to random people on the internet. And even if I suck at updating this when I'm sad, it's at least good in some ways. It motivates me to read books, and to think about books, and to try to make myself a better person through learning and writing. Unfortunately, that last item doesn't seem to be working. But hey. No reason to stop trying.

SO ARISTOTLE. (After that borderline livejournal rant.)

I intended to read Aristotle and an Aardvark Go to Washington, once again by Catchcart and Klein, before I went on a trip with my chapter of Junior States of America to Washington D.C. This was a fail, due to immense amounts of work and drama prior to the trip, but I did get around to finishing it shortly after returning home.

If not the most educational of the books in this series, it was one of the more amusing ones. See, Cathcart and Klein, philosophy majors of course, are rather... liberal. Where "rather" here means "zomg extremely." The book essentially outlines the major ways that one can pose arguments. truly, it's a book mainly about the philosophy of logic and very little about the philosophy of government. A lot of time is spent covering informal fallacies, formal fallacies, doublespeak, personal attacks, post hoc ego proctor hoc, ad hominem, stuff like that. I reall enjoyed covering these a little more in depth. In my philosophy class, we touched on them briefly, but I didn't really get to see all that many details.

I did see examples in this book. Liberal examples.

Nearly every example of what not to do was a Bush example. Or sometimes a Reagan or Nixon example. Occasionally, they'd throw in a Clinton reference ("It depends on what the definition of the word is is." Which, funnily, is an entirely logically sound, if "illogical" argument). But mostly, it was all DOWN WITH REPBULICANS, all the time.

With all that I'm exposed to, I should be a flamingly liberal. My sister is an uber hipseter who is friends with various socialists in college, my mother is a raging liberal largely due to her views on education, I read Time magazine every week, and I read books like this. Yes, I do tend to lean democratic... but I'm not quite as liberal as Cathcart and Klein. Still, funny.

They referred to Bush frequently as "the greatest logician of our time" (har) and also cited Marx (Groucho.... not Karl) and Woody Allen often. 'Twas lolztastic.

I'd definitly recommend it to anyone into debate, politics, or laughter. Mayhaps not to a Republican, however, unless you'd like to be offended or converted.

And now, my favorite quote!

An example of syllogism:

(A delegate to the Utah Republican Convention was arguing that a fence should be constructed along the entire US-Mexican border, to prevent illegal immigrants from entering.)

GOP Official: What happens if the illeegals climb the fence?

Delegate: You electrify it. They won't touch it then.

Official: But what if they touch it? You would let them die?

Delegate: It would be there choice.

Official: What about a mother with a baby strapped to her back?Would you let the mother and the baby die?

Delegate: It would be the mother's choice to kill that baby.

Official: Then you're in favor of abortion?

Dead. Silence.

SO GOOD. Tidbits like this were why I loved this book.

Total Book Count: 17

NonFic: 2 (11.8%)

Memento Mori

To keep with the theme of my life, I should really be reading The Awakening by Kate Chopin right now (If you get that, you are such a creep). But alas, I am not quite that masochistic. Instead, I have read nothing new the past few days, but am going, today, to talk about death.

Specifically, what would happen if Heidegger and a Hippo Walked through Those Pearly Gates.

Like in Plato and a Platypus, Thomas Cathcart and Daniel Klein sought to explain philosophy through a combination of jokes and funny stories. I enjoyed it, certainly, but I can't say that it was as good as Plato and a Platypus. It just wasn't as funny, and I didn't feel like I learned as much. Still, glad I read it.

Every time I read philosophy, I find myself becoming more and more of an atheist. I hate when good theories become bad because a philosopher feels the need to bring in God (see the footnote of my last post) and I also become more aware, each time I read philosophy, of why religion was created. This book was the latter type. It spent a fairly significant amount of time explaining why humans created religion not because there was legitimate reason to believe in any religion, but because people want security after death- they want to know what is in the great unknown, and they want to think it's good. Although religions vary greatly, nearly every single one is based around the premise of some sort of afterlife, whether than be heaven, reincarnation, or something entirely different. It is thus logical to conclude that the purpose of religion is to satisfy the natural human need for feeling safe.

The book spent a fair amount of time talking about the different philosophies of how to "live in eternity now," which is a branch of philosophy that I was already fairly well educated on beforehand. I also wasn't all that interested in the parts about other-worldly contact, since I'm fairly confident that it's all bogus. What did interest me were the portions about "accepting death as a lifestyle choice" and biotechnology.

I think it's important to start off with saying that I am not afraid to die. That's not to say that I'm necessarily suicidal, but rather, that I accept that I will die, I have no control over that, and I don't think I'll care about it all that much a second after it happens, seeing as I'll be dead. I guess I am a bit of an existentialist in that I am completely comfortable with accepting my impending death- one of my favorite quotes is "Memento Mori" (Remember: you will die). I liked reading a little bit more about those philosophies.
There was a fair amount in the accepting death chapter about suicide- about how Camus spoke out against it and stuff. Plus some rather funny lines from Bill Maher like "Suicide is our way of saying to God, 'You can't fire me. I quit.'" Aside from the pointlessness of offing oneself, the book highlight some other points of view, like Hume's belief that it's a detriment to society, or how Kant believed (keeping with everything he ever wrote, bit of a one note guy) that it was our duty to not kill ourselves. I was familiar with these already, but liked reading them anyway.

The biotechnology portion was cool just because biotech is rather sweet. There was a lot about how life spans are being elongated by new technology, and how at some point, humans may indeed be immortal. And it wasn't schmaltzy either.

The one thing that I hated about this book though was "Daryl," the depressed character, terrified for death, who the book was essentially written to. The humor involving him was cheap and stupid, and I didn't like how the narrator spoke to him as if speaking to the greater audience. Ugh. Daryl was stupid. It was almost insulting to read lines directed at him that were also partially directed at the reader.

Still, You should read it.

Total Book Count: 12
Nonfiction: 1

Surely, this is the best of all possible blogs!

I read Candide ages ago (funny story,-to have something to talk about with a boy whom I liked) and rather enjoyed it. Yet somehow, I didn't find myself enjoying it nearly as much this time around. The way that the story progresses, from one short chapter to the next, annoys me. I like more development than that. I also dislike the flatness of all the characters, although I know it is intentional. Still... I like longer stories, with more character development and less LISTEN TO MY POINT OF VIEW.

That being said, it's a good point of view. I always thought Leibniz's philosophy was a wee bit stupid, as is most philosophy that is religiously centered*. Really on premise, I don't disagree with the fact that this is the "best of all possible worlds." As a hard determinist, I believe this is the only possible world. Causal principle states that this is the only world that could have existed according to the laws of physics, genetics, etc. Thus, being the only possible world, it is the best. The only thing is, it is also the worst. It is only what it is, and it could be nothing else. The only issue that I really have with the philosophy is that the rationalization is "God is perfect, ergo the world he created is." As an agnostic who is becoming increasingly more like an atheist, this is the part that  don't like. 

Also, do authors still make fun of each other in their works? Throughout the novel (novella?), Voltaire is constantly making little jabs at his critics, peers, and enemies. Perhaps I am reading books in the wrong circles, but I have not read a modern book that goes about criticism in this manner. I would like to though- suggestion in the comments? If you know of any?

I also like the little references to the historical events of the time. Granted, I don't understand most of them, as I'm not very well versed in the politics of that time period, but I understand enough of them to appreciate that they all must be almost equally amusing, if not more amusing.

Total Book Count: 12 (damn... I need to read)

NonFic: 1 (yes, I still need to get around to this one)

*Like George Berkley's theory. I love Berkley when he's not being religious. When he's just like "to be is to be perceived." So essentially, nothing we see/perceive officially exists. Everything is just a perception. But then he gets all "but GOD always sees" and I start to hate his philosophy. Ugh. Why must theology always mix with philosophy? Silly humans and their need for security in the after life. Religion is such a hindrance to philosophical debate.

Ah your nose... ahem. Your nose is... rather large.

Because I am lazy and have only been reading books for English class (mostly) I write today of Cyrano de Bergerac by Edmond Rostand. So.

Basically- Cyrano has a big nose, but is very courageous and smart and poetic and stuff. He likes Roxane, who is basically just hot. Then Christian, who is also basically just hot, also loves Roxane. But Christian is an idiot. So Cyrano promises to provide Christian with words to say to woo Roxane, since Roxane has already fallen for Christian's smoking bod. Then Christian and Cyrano go to war, and Roxane (being, y'know, super intelligent and all) follows them because she loves the letters Cyrano sends her (signed by Christian) so much. And then she says she's love Christian even if he were ugly (zomg like Cyrano!) because of his pretty words. And then Christian dies, Cyrano won't admit he wrote the letters to be honorable, and Roxane goes to live in a nunnery for 14 years until Cyrano admits it as he dies.

Essentially, this play is supposed to be about how inner beauty ultimately trumps outer beauty. Since Roxane understands the deepness of Cyrano's soul. The last major symbol of thi in the book is Cyrano/Christian's last letter to Roxane. It is soaked with Cyrano's tears (his soul as he wrote) and Christian's blood (his body as he died). So yeah. Symbolic.

As this was a book I read for my English class, you know what that must mean- an angry rant! YAY!

The point has come that I literally hate having discussions in my English class because close-mindedness and ill-argued points irritate me so much. So a few major rant-points that I'd like to cover. (Point of clarification- is it still a rant if I use bullet points? Or is that too organized-and-not-angsty?) Anyways. Most will be about the double standards in this play.

• ---Essentially, throughout the course of the play, Roxane learns to value Cyrano's intelligence, but both Cyrano and Christian speak (in a poetic manner) solely of Roxane's beauty. This is a double standard. The man's mind is valued, but the woman's is not. Throughout the play, Roxane never really illustrates that she is an intelligent person. Essentially, she spends the whole time saying "Say pretty words to me. Please say pretty words to me. Prettywordsprettywordsprettywords."
• ---Cyrano calls Roxane intelligent once in the whole play. Christian does the same. No one else mentions her intelligence. I think that a compliment on intelligence should be taken with a grain of salt coming from someone like Christian. And Cyrano's opinion also isn't cannon. As shows this lovely explanation.
• ---‎"Because he and Roxane have known each other so long, Cyrano may see qualities in his lady love that are not readily apparent to others. It does not seem possible that one of his intelligence and sensitivity should be in love with a woman totally committed to the shallowness and pretentiousness of the précieuse philosophy."
• ---As stated, Roxane is a member of the precieuse society. She is materialistic, well-dressed, and beautiful. These things do not show great intelligence.
• ---The one point I will concede is that in the final act of the play, Cyrano recites his "gazette" to Roxane. Perhaps the argument could be made that this shows that Roxane cared about the news. But as the "gazette" was pretty much just all court gossip, it does not speak volumes about Roxane's intelligence.

The rant-y (but not all that rant-y) portion is now done. Honestly, I don't care that much about the double standard in this play, because I don't think it's that big of a deal, and it would match that time period. I just became frustrated with my English teacher's complete denial that such a double standard existed.Overall, I liked this play a lot. There's some phallic imagery, but I thought it was only mildly amusing, not crude (and not hilariously funny, either). Plus, the symbolism was really good, even if it seems a little cliche now. I would definitely recommend it, and I think it would also be a fun play to perform.

Total Book Count: 11

NonFic: 1 (YAY! I'll get to that in my next post.)

ZOMBIES!!!!! AAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!

Although the coming Zombie Apocalypse  is possibly inevitable, I admit that up until last week, I had not taken any steps to prepare myself. I neglected to read the zombie apocalypse handbook, I do not watch Man vs. Wild, and I am not familiar with zombie weaknesses.

Thankfully, I am now better prepared.

Zombicorns by John Green is a zombie apocalypse novella that was written for charity. It was released online a few months ago, and I only just discovered it this week. Thank God I did. I now feel protected and amused.

Zombicorns as a disclaimer, has nothing to do with unicorns. Rather, it is about zombies that become "z'ed up" after consuming diseased corn. They then spend the rest of their existence attempting to grow more corn to infect the rest of the population and force uninfected humans to eat the corn.

The main character in the novel (Mia) has somehow avoided getting z'ed up, although her parents and sister were infected. She actually had to shoot both her father and her mother in order to survive, but she still watches over her little zombified sister. She brings her food, and tosses to her as she works in the cornfield. She is unable to accept that her sister's soul is gone.

Eventually, Mia meets Caroline, another girl who has survived. Together, they spend a lot of time slaying zombies (Caroline's really good at it)  and going around Chicago. They decide together that they will try to flee to Canada, where it is too cold to grow corn and thus too cold for zombies. But Mia is hesitant. She doesn't want to leave her sister. So Caroline shoots her sister. So Mia shoots Caroline. And the book ends.

I finished this book last Friday, and it was really absolutely perfect timing. My aunt, who works as a librarian at the Library of Congress, is a big fan of zombie apocalypse novels and zombies survival skills. I was actually able to have a legitimate conversation with her about how to survive if zombies attacked, and what to do to avoid being infected. I taught her about different anti-zombie weapons and zombie slaying techniques and she explained to me how to build a water-powered generator. We also discussed supplies. I said that convenience stores are the best play to find stuff because supermarkets will be scavenged too quickly. She suggested finding the warehouses where different suppliers are located. Apparently, she already knew knew some. We also discussed how all zombie apocalypse novels are metaphors for the society that we live in, the havoc that will occur when fossil fuels run out, nuclear war, or famine and disease.

It was a bit of an epic conversation.

Even though John insisted that it was poorly written, I thought it still had some really great lines like "I came to the conclusion a while ago that there is nothing romantic or supernatural about loving someone:  Love is the privilege of being responsible for another. " So good. It totally exemplifies why Mia continued to care for her sister when she was a zombie. It also says a lot about the way we love. I know that when I love someone, I want to protect them and care for them. I end up being responsible for them, especially if they need me. And maybe, that bond is stronger than plain old love. You can't shirk your duty.

I really liked this book because it was laugh-out-loud funny, surprisingly deep, and different from what John usually writes. I was happy to get a new fix.

The only thing that I didn't like about this book was that I didn't realize that Mia was a girl until halfway through. She wasn't called by name until she met Caroline, and she really acted more like a boy than a girl. I think this says a bit about John Green's writing ability. He's at his best when he essentially writes about himself, awkward, former-John teenage boy character. Mia was the same type of character. She was just a girl, and it felt a bit random. I like John's boys.

Also, new font. You like?

Total Books: 9

NonFic: 0, but I'm reading one now.

Papertastic Paper Towns

I am a fan of Paper Towns by John Green. I wrote several college essays abouts it, I made an actual paper town out of origami, and now I have written another essay about it, for a scholarship that I'm applying to. I just finished reading Paper Towns again, so I figured I'd share it. So yeah. Here it is. Any feedback would be welcome. It's based off a Francis Bacon quote. But I've deleted the quote because other people applying to the scholarship have been googling it. (Which, imo, is stupid. If they were smart enough to qualify for the scholarship, I'm sure they're smart enough to write a good response to it.)

Young adult literature has a reputation. It is often said to lack substance, often categorized as the precursor to “Chick Lit.” Books placed in the young adult sections of public libraries and book stores are doomed by many to the schema of fun but useless reads. Yet, this is certainly not always the case. The novel Paper Towns by John Green is a perfect example of this.

At first glance, Paper Towns is a “typical” young adult novel. The first portion of the book centers on a wild adventure through central Florida, following the exploits of Margo Roth Spiegleman, the unpredictable and mysterious female protagonist, and her childhood best friend Quentin. The pair spends the night getting revenge on those whom Margo once considered friends, pulling asinine pranks like putting fish in people’s cars and Vaseline on doorknobs. Then, the next day, Margo disappears. Quentin, who, in typical young adult novel fashion, has a crush on Margo, is bewildered. He expected to reconnect with Margo after years of drifting apart, but is left with the knowledge that she has run away for reasons he cannot understand. The remainder of the novel follows Quentin as he bonds with his friends and attempts to find Margo

From this brief summary, Paper Towns seems like a simple novel about adventure, pranks, and teen love. Yet, Paper Towns is not a candy bar book, a book that’s fun to read but that has no real value. Paper Towns is a meat-and-potatoes kind of book; it deserves to be read diligently and carefully.

Underneath it’s fun exterior, Paper Towns is about learning to imagine others complexly. Quentin, in the early parts of the novel, idolizes Margo, placing her upon a tall and towering pedestal. She is, in Quentin’s mind, perfect. She is popular, smart, brave, and spontaneous. Yet, as Quentin uncovers more details about Margo’s life, he begins to realize that he never truly knew her. Underneath her thin façade of happiness and perfection, Margo was depressed, lonely, and often confused. As Quentin begins to realize this, he gets to know Margo better. “Margo,” Quentin learned, “was not a miracle. She was not an adventure. She was not a fine and precious thing. She was a girl.”

The central theme of the novel is beautifully covered in one quote from the book: “what a treacherous thing to believe that a person is more than a person.” Paper Towns should be read diligently and with attention because this message is important in every person’s life. If one places others upon pedestals, one can only be doomed to comparative mediocrity. If we as people think of our friends and loved ones as perfect, we can only be disappointed in ourselves and each other. Paper Towns is a book that should be read carefully because this is a message that everyone needs to hear, a message found in a young adult novel, where most would expect it least.

Total Book Count: 8
Nonfiction: 0

Ibsen Fan-girlism

I told myself that I would update this on the first of February- that I would at least blog once a month. But alas, February 1 passed and I failed to write a blog post. I also failed to read very much, but I did at least read some pretty damn worthwhile literature.

Mmmmmmmmmmmm. Ibsen.

I am an Ibsen fan girl. I love him so much that I can even forgive him for occasionally using the grammatically incorrect “that” instead of “who” (mostly because I blame the translator). I like Ibsen because he is real, and clever, and he writes plays, and he has good last words, and he has an interesting view of Victorian ideals in the home and related to death, and because he’s hot shit.

This month (where “this month” is not actually “this month,” but rather “last month,” meaning January), I reread A Doll’s House and also read Hedda Gabler for the first time.

Quick Summary (non lol catz):

A Doll’s House: Nora eats macaroons. Husband Torvald scolds his “squirrel” for being a sweet tooth. Nora asks for mo monies. Nora meets old friend (Mrs. Linde). Nora tells Mrs. Linde she borrowed money from Krogstad to bring her husband to Italy to make him stop being ill. Krogstad says “Yo, Nora, you didn’t get your dad’s signature for the loan. That’s illegal!” Nora flips out. Krogstad threatens to tell Torvald, who is his boss at the bank. Nora flips out. Torvald finds out and flips out at Nora. Nora realizes she’s an independent woman and decides she doesn’t need a man to flip out on her. Door slam.

Hedda Gabler: Hedda shamelessly uses her dumb husband. Her old flame, Eilert Loveborg writes a beast book, with the help of Mrs. Elvested, who loves him. It pwns Hedda’s husbands future book, even though Eilert is a drunk. Eilert gets drunk and loses his manuscript. Hedda’s husband finds it and gives it to Hedda.  Eilert comes to Hedda to flip out after a night of drunken debauchery. Hedda gives him a gun and tells him to kill himself. He does, sort of, but does a wimpy job of it. Hedda burns the manuscript, because it’s Elvested and Eilert’s “baby” and then kills herself. Gun shot.

I actually read them both twice. Because I’m an Ibsen fan girl like that (and…um…because I obsessively study for English tests).

Speaking of English tests… You know what annoys me?

(What, Jackie, what annoys you?)

English teachers who miss major symbolism in works of literature. Take A Doll’s House. There’s this character in the play named Dr. Rank. His name is ironic on many levels. He is a doctor, so thus, a well-educated man. His name is Rank, which should mean “high ranking” or prestigious or something. But then, he is essentially treated as worthless by the other characters. He is considered a friend when a friend is needed, but the main couple in the play (Nora and Torvald) don’t care for more than a few seconds when he announces his imminent death by leaving calling cards with black Xs in the at the house. This highly ranked man is treated as if he does not matter. That’s Ibsenian irony for you.

But no, my English teacher does not understand this. My English teacher insists on calling him Dr. Stinky.

The frustration that I feel over the caliber of English classes in the American education system cannot be conveyed in words. Stinky. Really. Grr.

Another thing, too.  The title. For an assignment on the book, I was asked to explain why A Doll House is the more “appropriate” and “correct” title. Here is my answer:

I disagree with the statement that A Doll House is a more appropriate title, and the opinions of most people in the academic community support my stance on the issue of the title. The title A Doll’s House is used in most of the modern translations and most of the historic translations of Ibsen’s play. Most scholars (including William Archer, Paul Walsh, and Michael Meyer), agree that this is the more appropriate title. According to Egil Tornqvist, one of the most popular Danish scholars of our time, the Norwegian title, “Et Dukkehjem,” literally translates to “a small, cozy, neat home.” However, as this makes quite a poor title indeed, A Doll’s House is typically used. Thus, it cannot be said that the widely held opinion is that A Doll House is more appropriate than A Doll’s House.

So yeah. Not a great question.

Alas, though. This has been a complete bitching post. I really do adore A Doll’s House, and it is only for this reason that I become rather annoyed by people who get things wrong about it. It’s a fricking beast play. I listened to the audio book version from librivox last year and absolutely loved it (and I believe, blogged about it). Rereading it (twice) was just as fun.

Hedda Gabler is probably my favorite play by Ibsen, just because I absolutely adore Hedda. She’s such a manipulative, crazy bitch. It’s amazing. I at times find myself wanting to be like her. And then I realize she’s crazy. But I still kind of want to be her.

Gabler is the Ibsen play that most focuses on the themes of suicide. Essentially, Eilert kills himself because he has lost his greatest work and shamed himself by becoming drunk after long-term abstinence. Then, Hedda kills herself because Eilert did not kill himself heroically (his gun shot from his breast pocket into his stomach), her husband is working with Mrs. Elvested and no longer focusing on her, and she is failing at manipulating. The largest reason, however, is that her friend Judge Brack knows that she gave Eilert the gun that led to his death, and thus can control her with the threat of telling the police.

Hedda does not like to be controlled.

I think that the way that Ibsen thought about death is very interesting. In The Master Builder, the main character kills himself (maybe) by jumping off a tower after he is no longer the master builder anymore. Also, in A Doll’s House, Nora, on multiple occasions, states that she is not courageous enough to commit suicide, even though she might be involved in a huge scandal. Also, Dr. Rank, when Nora does not accept his love, essentially allows himself to die, as he is at that point, “worthless.”

Thus, in Ibsen’s works, it is clear that any character who fails to be courageous or fails to be worthwhile typically dies, usually at their own hands. I think this is interesting, and I intend to write my English research paper on it this year.

I read Looking for Alaska by John Green on Alaska Young Day. 'Twas just as awesome as usual.

I also read The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck in January, to prepare for AcaDec. All I have to say is

Old man on boob.

Total Book Count: 6 (eep)

Nonfiction: 0 (0% eep)

In Summation

This year has been a fun year, if a stressful one. I started out strong in January, reading 27 books in a month, and ended strong in December with 20 books. In between- I had some bad months. This past year was rather busy, and I didn't come close to the 155 books that I read this year, but this was also the first year that I wasn't in a hospital. So I have an excuse.
I really enjoyed reading and writing about what I read. I watched my blog views spike during the summer and then essentially disappear again (Russian viewers, where did you go?). But that's okay. I did this for me. And I'm glad I did.

Some Facts:

*In total, I read 100 books including:

• 27 Nonfiction
• 29 Young adult fiction
• 28 Normal fiction
• 14 Plays
• 2 Graphic novels

*Of those, I was rereading 33 and reading 67 for the first time.

*Of the nonfiction, I read 14 books about neuroscience/psychology.

*The authors who I read the most books from:

• Lemony Snicket (15)
• J. K. Rolling (6)
• William Shakespeare (4)
• John Green (3)
• Jim Butcher (3)

*My favorite books that I read this year were (in no particular order):

• The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat- Oliver Sacks
• Atlas Shrugged- Ayn Rand 
•  Looking For Alaska- John Green
•  East of Eden- John Steinbeck
• Cocktail Party Cheat Sheets - Mental Floss Magazine
•  What's the Difference?- Mental Floss Magazine
•  Paper Towns- John Green
•  The Fountainhead- Ayn Rand
•  Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex- Mary Roach
• The End- Lemony Snicket
•  Plato and a Platypus Walk into a Bar- Thomas Cathcart & Daniel Klein
• Mrs. Warren's Profession- George Bernard Shaw
• A Mind of It's Own- Cordelia Fine
• "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman"- Richard P. Feynman
• And the list goes on... lots of things are my favorite.

*I had the most views from the US (700 in the past 6 months). Then 60 from Russia, 35 from Thailand, 30 from Italy, 30 from Poland, 25 from the Ukraine, Columbia, and India, and 15 from France and Bulgaria.

*Most of my views came from internet explorer, though I got quite a few from Chrome as well (mostly from YOU, one specific awesome reader). Plus a handful from Firefox, Safari, Opera, and Glue. And a few from Java, Jakarta, and Netscape. Wee.

*My biggest traffic sources were facebook, blogger, nerdfighters.com, and yandex.ru (the russian search engine).

*I got hits from google Guatemala, Canada, UK, China, Ukraine, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, and more.

*Funniest search that led to my blog- "Women Sex Animals" from Saudi Arabian google. I died. Hello, person who searched that. I'm sorry that I'm not a sex animal, but I hope you enjoyed reading about literature!

*I got 2 views from ipods. Question- who cares enough about this blog to check it from their ipod?

I'm going to continue to track my books in excel, and I may write here from time to time. But I'm no sure that'll I'll make a regular thing of it this year, writing for every single book. Maybe just when I really have something to say.
Oh lovely blog readers, I have enjoyed your occasional views and rarer comments. Keep reading!

--Jackie

The Final Three- Finally

No Exit by Jean Paul Sartre is a play about three people, together in hell, making the best (or worst) of it. It is most famous for the quote:

"Hell is other people."

I  think that this statement, for me at least, is true. This is not to say that I dislike people- I think I'm a relatively social person. Rather, I think that Sartre's intended message rings true for me. It is hell to depend on other people for self-worth or to define yourself by other people.
Throughout the play, the different characters are forced to rely on each other in order to decide how they feel about themselves. Ines acts as a mirror for Estelle and Garcin seeks validation from the other two that he is a good man. I too, in my life, seek validation far too frequently. I have a friend who likes to joke that I equate grades with love, that I equate the judgement of others in the form of letters and number with my own self-worth. My friend is correct. If I get a bad grade, it ruins my day, and occasionally, my week. I depend on praise from teachers to know that I am a decent person and have a difficult time being proud of what I accomplish at times. I make my own hell for myself, by allowing people to become my hell.
I really liked this play, and the themes it touched on. I thought that it was slightly shocking at times, but also extremely realistic. Also, I feel that some of Sartre's work can just be "Mehmehmeh, I'm an existentialist," but this wasn't that way at all. It was subtle, yet clear.

The Girl With the Flammable Skirt by Aimee Bender. My sister, you is a total freaking hipster (who I love), gave it to me for Christmas because
A. It has "skirt" in the title, and I only wear skirts.
B. It's her favorite author.
Extremely postmodernist in style, the book was certainly different from what I typically read. It was a collection of short stories, many of which were sexual, made little sense, or ended really abruptly. I enjoyed the different pacing and style. Usually, I can't read collections of short stories straight through, but I actually read this in one day (partially because I had to in order to hit 100, yes). The book was weird though. Weird as hell.
There was a story about a girl watching her boyfriend go un-evolve, going from man, to ape, and eventually to guppy. There was a story about a man with a physical hole in his stomach. There was a story about a mermaid and an imp, which ended extremely abruptly with the mermaid telling the imp that she knew what he was, but saying nothing else.
Then there were the stories about sex. The girl in the fancy dress, who followed a man home and made him cut it off of her only to find that he wouldn't have sex with her. Or of a librarian who, following the death of her father, had sex with nearly every man who walked into the library, letting them play out their librarian fantasy. Bender's sex stories were the least weird, because sex is far more natural and realistic than a boy turning into a guppy.
Recommended.

The Master Builder is a play by Henrik Ibsen, one of my favorite playwrights. It is centered Harvard Soleness, a builder who is fighting against the incoming youth and attempting to get ahead. He carries on a sort of affair with a woman, Hilda, from his younger days after she tells him that he once kissed her and promised to build her a castle. Also, his wife and a doctor think he's mad. And he refuses to let his assistant, Ragnar Brovik, move forward with career even as his father, Knut Brovik, is dying. When he finally lets Ragnar get ahead, he decides to climb the tower of his newest building to hang the wreath, even though he is terrified of heights. He falls and dies, which I think sort of symbolizes the ultimate failure that he met by letting youth get ahead.
Like all of Ibsen's plays, it's extremely well written, but it is less thematically straight-forward then, say, A Doll's House. It's fairly symbolic in a way, with Hilda acting as both a source of inspiration for Soleness and a temptress.
It reminds me a bit of Hamlet, as the other characters think Soleness is crazy, and of The Fountainhead, as Hilda is Dominique-like and it's about architecture.
I intend to do my research paper for my English class on it. Should be fun.
BUT- OH MA GAWD IBSEN USES "THAT" INSTEAD OF "WHO"
Seriously my biggest grammar pet peeve. That is a thing. Who is a person. You should never use the phrase "She is a girl that..."
No. She is a girl who. Because she is a girl. Damn it. I blame the translator. Ibsen could not make such a grave error.
This is mad choppy. But I am tired. Way to go out with an anti-bang, right?

Total Books: 100
NonFic: 27 (27%)

Summation post soon!

The Series of Unfortunate Events- In 6 days and 2500 Words

I READ 100 BOOKS THIS YEAR!!!!!! Yay. :) I will put off my celebrations for now and actually finish writing about all I read:

Over the course of about 6 days, I read the entire Series of Unfortunate Events, plus the two companion books Lemony Snicket: The Unauthorized Autobiography and The Beatrice Letters. Although they are children's books, I am rather proud of myself for devouring them so quickly. Plus, I truly enjoyed reading them- they brought me back to my childhood and I was able to pick up on things that I had missed when I read them years ago.

I suppose I'll just go in order, starting with book 4 (as I talked about 1-3 here), listing some of my thoughts on each:

4- The Miserable Mill

• Main Premise: The orphans work in a dangerous lumber factory, Klaus gets hypnotized by the optometrist, who is evil and working with her secretary "Shirley" (Count Olaf in disguise). The orphans meet "Sir," the boss at the lumber mill, his partner Charles, and Phil, an optimistic worker.
• I like that "Georgina Orwell" the optometrist, can be linked to George Orwell's 1984. She can essentially be thought of as a sort of "big brother," as she hypnotizes and controls Klaus. Cool.
• Although I don't like the earlier books in the series, as VFD hasn't been introduced yet, I still really enjoyed MM. I like when characters in earlier books pop up in later novels. Both Sir and Charles reappear in The Penultimate Peril and Phil Reappears in The Grimm Grotto. Olaf, of course, appears everywhere (drat). Most interestingly, in The End, KitSnicket mentions that Charles used to send her maps and other helpful material, implying that he is a member of VFD.

5- The Austere Academy

• I really like this book because it is the first time that the orphans are introduced to the concept of VFD. However, I never really liked the two Quagmire triplets. I thought that, as far as characters go, they were absurdly flat and boring, only existing as a plot device.
• However, it is interesting to note that the triplets, named Duncan and Isadora, were named after the dancer Isadora Duncan. Clever, Lemony.
• I preferred reading about Carmelita Spats, the bothersome little girl at the school and the favorite of both Olaf and Principal Nero. She amused me, as least somewhat. Certain articles that I read suggested that her constant use of the the word "cakesniffers" to describe people was based of Holden Caulfield constant use of the word "phony." I'm sorry, theorists, but no. I love Holden Caulfield, and Carmelita is exceedingly unpleasant. I refuse to believe that.
• The motto on the entry way to the school, "memento mori" has always... interested me, I guess. Meaning "Remember, you will die," I feel that it is appropriate for the story, and especially appropriate for this book. Prior to book five, the Baudelaire orphans spend all of their times running from Count Olaf, keeping their heads down and their noses clean. From the fifth book on, the Baudelaires have a reason to stir up trouble, so to speak. They must go after the Quagmire triplets and actively attempt to gain knowledge about VFD. As there mission becomes more dangerous, I think that the school motto is rather appropriate. Entering into the dangerous world with an active mission, the orphans must remember that they could die.

6- The Ersatz Elevator

• Now it gets interesting. The second JS, Jerome Squalor, is introduced along with his evil wife Esme Squalor. This book is perhaps the last one in which the orphans really experience a sort of freedom that isn't completely overshadowed with anxiety and despair. For there first few days in the penthouse, they are able to do as they wish, for the most part, and are able to live in the city where they grew up. Additionally, in this novel, none of them are ever explicitly threatened by Count Olaf, who is disguised as an auctioneer.
• I think that this is the first book where you get a glimpse of Fernando (the hook handed-man) acting kindly towards the Baudelaires. Although he eventually helps to steal the Quagmires at the auction, he is kind to the children while acting as doorman.
• Esme Squalor's name is taken from J. D. Salinger's Story "For Esme- With Love and Squalor." Still, I refuse to believe that cakesniffers is a JD reference.

7- The Vile Village

• For some reason, this book has always been my least favorite in the series. Excluding the section in which Jacques Snicket is present, I found it to be rather boring, possibly due to the fact that I have never liked the Quagmire triplets and I did not like Hector, the Baudelaire's main caretaker.
• The scene in which Jacques Snicket dies is the first one that I remember crying over when I read the books as a child. Jacques, a man representative of love, life, and information, died and he was mistaken for Count Olaf. I remember bawling.,
• This book also serves as a sort of turning point in the novel, as after this book, theBaudelaires are thought to be criminals and Olaf is thought to be dead. Thus, they can no longer even attempt to rely in Mr. Poe for help.

8- The Hostile Hospital

• Also not my favorite book, but still solid. There are a ton of anagrams in this book, as all of Count Olaf's assistants are given fake names when they work in the hospital and Violet gets a fake name as well. Anagrams are always fun. At one point in the story, there is a list of hospital patients, and all of the names are anagrammed. The names of the author, illustrator, and publisher are all used.
• There is a picture at the beginning of one of the chapter about the "Volunteers Fighting Disease." It depicts a volunteer, holding a guitar that says "This Volunteer Fights Disease." I actually took out my phone and sent a picture of it to several friends, as I was quite amused. It was, of course, a reference to Woodie Guthrie's guitar, which bore the message "This Machine Kills Fascists." This is why I love Lemony Snicket. His references are just amazing.
• Also, I really like the illustrations. I am a fan of sketchy drawings, and Brett Helequist (the illustrator) is excellent. I might try to blow up some of his pictures to frame.
• As far as the rest of this book goes, the portion about the Snicket file was interesting, but other than that, there's not that much to comment on. But OOH, in this book it appears that a Baudelaire parent is alive, according to the Snicket file. But then, it turns out to beQuigley Quagmire, who is equally awesome, so no complaints here.

9- The Carnivorous Carnival

• I am most definitely a fan of this book. The orphans learn a fair amount about VFD and they begin to realize that they commit acts that are not necessarily noble (although this sort of starts in HH).
• The psychic at the carnival is named Olivia Caliban, but she is never mentioned with Friday or Miranda Caliban, who are mentioned in The End. I wonder if they're related.
• The hunchback in the freak show is named "Hugo" just as the author of The Hunchback ofNotre Dame is named Victor Hugo.

10- The Slippery Slope

• This is possibly my favorite book in the series, although it's very difficult to decide. I like how much they learn about VFD, and I like that in this book, the reader is able to see Count Olaf alone more, when he is atop the mountain with Sunny. The reader is able to understand his weaknesses and his fears a little bit more, as Olaf is clearly scared of the evil man and woman who join him.
• Yay Quigley Quagmire! He's my favorite Quagmire, by far. He's the most intelligent and interesting, and is able to provide vital material about VFD.
• In this book, when Violet and Klaus find a bowl of strawberries in the refrigerator, they feel that they are slightly useless. However, the narrator comments that if a man came and began to poke you repeatedly until you gave him strawberries, they would be very helpful. I use a modified version of this concept quite often to explain the usefulness of seemingly useless things. For example, you were to learn, for instance, that the word "nerd" may come from drunk spelled backwards, which is "knurd," you may think that this piece of information is useless. However, if an ax murderer ever approached you and same "Tell me the etymology of the word 'nerd' or I shall kill you!" You would be able to survive. So congratulations, I may have just saved your life.

11- The Grimm Grotto

• Damn... this is getting really long. But I will persevere.
• I like this book to. :) I thought that learning about Anwhistle Aquatics and the medusoidmycellium, a reference to Medusa. I really like the scene in which the orphans and Fiona are in Anwhistle Aquatics looking through the detritus. They find so much that is linked with other books, from newspaper articles to lamps.
• The name of the ship, the Queequeg, is a reference to the name of a character in Moby Dick. I only remember this because I read Moby Dick around the same time that I readThe Grimm Grotto (because I felt like being an impressive 12-year-old).

12- The Penultimate Peril

• I nearly forgot to write about this book. Which is weird, because it's one of my favorites.
• The book definitely explains the most about VFD and answers the most questions. Nearly all of the characters are reintroduced and the reader finds that nearly everyone is connected with VFD in some way.
• This is also an interesting book because the orphans begin to seriously struggle with their own nobility. They had to burn down the hotel, give harpoon guns to children, and commit other potentially cruel and dangerous acts.
• This book also reinforces the theme of death for trios. One of the Quagmires was thought to be dead, one of the 3 Snickets siblings died, and one of the Denouement triplets died. I totally expected one of the Baudelaires to die in the last book, but nope.
• The use of the Dewey Decimal system to organize the hotel was cool. You could actually guess what was going on in different rooms based on the room numbers.

13- The End

• I was so furious when I first finished this book, because it barely answered any of the questions I had and actually introduced far more. I don't know if the islanders survived as they sailed away. I still don't know what was in the sugar bowl, what was in the Snicket file, and exactly how the Beatrice-Lemony thing went down. I don't know why Lemony Snicketwas on the run from the law and I don't really know what happened to most of the characters. I don't know if VFD survived, and I don't know if Sunny became a world renowned chef.
• Yet, it is my favorite book in the series (I may have said that about other ones... I take it back. This one. For sure.) Although it doesn't answer a lot of questions, it does answer some and it provided so much more material for theories. This series is left so open, the reader can really think of whatever he or she wants. Which is fun, but frustrating.
• I really liked all of the references to Moby Dick in this novel. The head of the island is Ishmael, and there are various references to boats and whales and crews and stuff. There are also a lot of references to Robinson Crusoe and the Tempest. Once again, I love reading references that I get. There were also references to the story of Adam and Eve, as there is a sort of tree of knowledge on the island that holds powerful apples. And a snake brings the apples to the people.
• I thought it was sweet how it ended, with Count Olaf and Kit Snicket sort of making up. Kit is heroic, as always, and Olaf actually shows that he has another side, a side that is not purely evil. It's sweet. I also like that the Baudelaires raise Beatrice, Kit's child, and that the reader finally discovers that Beatrice was the Snicket's mother and Lemony's lover.

Lemony Snicket- The Unauthorized Biography

• I liked this book far more the first time I read it, when I was actively searching for clues. Other than identifying some of the members of VFD through clues, it really doesn't provide any information central to the plot. Just VFD tidbits. It's still very fun though.
• The format is interesting, as well. A mix of letters, pictures, songs, transcripts, and scribbled notes, it really feels like a secret file rather than a book. Which totally works for the subject material.

The Beatrice Letters

• This was the only book in the series that I had not already read. Although not essential to the plot, it provided a fair amount of background information explaining the love between Lemony Snicket and Beatrice Baudelaire. Essentially, it seems that Lemony and Beatrice were engaged to be married, as they had loved each other since they went to VFD school together. Yet, Beatrice believed an article in the Daily Punctilio that Lemony was dead after Captain Windershins convinced her of the truthfulness of the article. She went ahead and married Bertrand, only to discover that Lemony was in fact alive. She then wrote a 200 page book to him, explaining her reasons for not marrying him. It is a sad story, although no more sad than the story of the Baudelaires.
• I think it is interesting to note that in Dante's Inferno, Beatrice was Dante's true love. Fun connection.
• I felt like such a child when I was reading this book, because it really is meant for ages 9-12. But it was good, so what evs. I even punched out the letters that come with the book and rearranged them to find the secret message "Beatrice Sank." Gawd. I felt like I was 9, spread out on my bedroom floor, doing a puzzle. Wow. But fun.

Other assorted things that I love:

• I love how Snicket deals with death in the book. He isn't overly sentimental and dramatic. He just states what happens, and allows the Baudelaires to react appropriately.
• I love the way that Snicket defines words throughout the story. It's an excellent tool for building kids' vocabulary.
• I love the references throughout the book to other works of literature and music. I always feel so clever when I catch them. :)
• I love the words that Sunny uses. Often times, they mean something in another language, are an anagrammed version of a word related to what she means, or are just funny. Like in one of the books, when Sunny makes a comment about a ring, she says "neiklot," which is Tolkien backwards. Other times, she says things like "media res" when referring to the middle of the story and "quid pro quo" when referring to a fair trade. Good stuff.
• I love Lemony Snicket.
• I love these books, and I love being reminded of my childhood.
• I love the wikipedia pages for this series. They're insanely detailed. It's pretty ridic.
• Btdubs... you should read this series.

This whole thing is likely a mess of typos and grammatical errors, but perhaps I shall fix it later. For now, I must work.

Total Book Count: 100

Nonfiction: 27 (27%... duh)