quietprofanity (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
quietprofanity) wrote2008-04-27 10:31 am
quietprofanity) wrote2008-04-27 10:31 am
Reviews, reviews, reviews, reviews ...
Alice in Wonderland/Through the Looking-Glass by Lewis Carroll
So, when I went on vacation my plane got delayed. Like, REALLY delayed. Like, so delayed that I was able to read "Alice in Wonderland" in the airport and "Through the Looking-Glass" on the plane. I realized I'd read "Alice in Wonderland" before -- the whole thing. I thought the last version I read was just an abridged version. Anyway ...
I realize just now that this review may be useless because even if you haven't read the books, you've probably seen enough adaptions to know what happens. So is reading the original books of any use? Well, I think so. I think of all of the early "girl goes to magic land" children's authors, Lewis Carrol is the most fun, just because of all the stuff he's willing to try. So instead of just a straight magic fantasy (like, say, Oz) you get some hybrid novel/poetry/math/logic lesson/chess ... thing. It's never boring -- I should say that much. And it's pretty short overall.
Reading Alice as an adult has been kind of neat for me. I think the books scared me a lot as a kid. And I never got why Alice wasn't scared out of her mind either, and acted like no little girl I ever met before. So when I was a kid I didn't like it. As an adult, I still don't believe Alice as a real little girl (although her being a girl having a dream gives it a little more "sense"), but I appreciate so much else in the book - particuarly the clever humor and poetry - that it doesn't bother me. I feel like I can really understand it now.
Not so much for the other book I read ...
Peter and Wendy/Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens/The Blot on Peter Pan by J.M. Barrie
Meanwhile, reading the Peter Pan cycle reminded me why I HATED the Peter Pan story as a kid. I always thought Wendy got a pretty sucky deal in Peter Pan with the whole "I'll be the Lost Boys' mother" thing. I mean, to me that just says you go to a fantasy land just to do CHORES. Oh, and every other girl on the island either ignores you (Tiger Lily), is mean to you (the mermaids) or actively plots your death and destruction (Tinkerbell). Fucking pass, dude. I still think that way.
However, if you're an adult and you want to go back and read one of the "girls go to a magic land" stories, this one is the most worth your time. J.M. Barrie has a ... unique view of childhood. How unique? Well, in one of the last lines of the book he describes children as "gay and innocent and heartless." Heartless. Also, Peter Pan is an absolute selfish psychopath. When the kids are flying to the Neverlands, sometimes they fall asleep in mid-air and start to fall to the earth, and Peter Pan LAUGHS, because he does not understand that they are ABOUT TO DIE. There's a lot of stuff like that in the books. Actually, G.K. Chesterton said the story is really more directed at adults than children, and I have to agree.
The first book, "Peter and Wendy", is basically the story we all know. Kind of. So I won't go into the plot too much. The second is a semi-prequel, which tells the origins of Peter Pan and about how he can fly because he's half bird and how fairies come out at night. There's also another girl in the story, Maimie, who helps out a homely little fairy and they build her a house and also learns not to be mean to her brother. I liked her a lot better than Wendy. The last isn't really a Peter Pan story ... it's this odd sort of biofic about a kid J.M. Barrie knew while he was writing Peter Pan that's kind of funny and clever.
I felt ... kind of nostalgic reading the story. If you're an adult you remember some of what it's like to be a kid, but not with an always-happy eye of innocence. It's really good stuff, in the end, even if I have no wish to go to Neverland.
The Promise by Chaim Potok
I loved this book. I loved the first book in the duology, The Chosen, which is about the growing friendship and growth between an Orthodox Jewish boy and a Hasidic Jewish boy during World War II. This book shows them as adults, and having to deal with a boy who is crazy, like really crazy.
I feel kind of at a loss for words, because I read this review and feel like anything I write would be identical to what she said. With a few exceptions, one is that I like Danny a lot more than she does, although I think that might be a leftover of the first book. (Also, I don't think the first book is so depressing -- the climatic scene redeems it). Reading the first book also puts more of Danny's thoughts on Freud into perspective.
She is SO ABSOLUTELY RIGHT about the female characters. I can only say that, Thank God, Chaim Potok did improve as he continued writing. Asher Lev's mother I remember being a good character, or at the very least more dynamic than the female characters in The Promise. And Potok was able to write women in three dimensions by the time he got to Davita's Harp. But still, SHEESH Rachel was an awfully-done character. I don't think Potok has chauvinistic viewpoints but she really was more of a MacGuffin than an actual character. She had nearly no thoughts of her own. It was almost like Potok went "If I say she reads James Joyce, that means she'll be smart!" without actually showing her to be smart.
The book overall is great, though. I liked how Potok can portray people he disagrees with (like Rav Kalman) as actual, real people and not just evil fundamentalists. And it was nice to be with people I met years ago when I read The Chosen again. I hope reading The Gift of Asher Lev and Old Men at Midnight will be a similar experience.
One final thought: I knew graduate school made people crazy. Whoo-wee.
Jesus and Yahweh: The Names Divine by Harold Bloom
I can hear you, you know. "HAROLD BLOOM?" you say. Why Harold Bloom? Everyone knows he's a jerk who most likely sexually harassed Naomi Wolf. Everyone knows he practically wants to take away our Harry Potter novels and burn them and picks on writers of color or female writers or female writers of color. WHY?
Well, the concept sounded interesting. The idea of a literary critique of Jesus and God and how they are different (which they are). However ... well, Bloom's writing is ... kind of nuts. He doesn't argue things. He just STATES things. And that's a real problem in a book where you're arguing something as incendiary as "The God of the Old Testament is not the God of the new." He has ideas. And they're interesting ideas. The most interesting idea is that the head of the Christian trinity isn't God the Father, but Jesus, as in the New Testament God the Father exists only in relation to the son. "God loves his son, Jesus. God loves the world so much he gives up his only son, which he loves, for the world." It's an interesting concept, but you don't say that as a lapsed Jew without BACKING IT UP. I also think his perception of the world is a little skewed. Especially when he says that the Holy Spirit is becoming the God of America because of the Pentecosts. Now, I've had two very good friends who were Pentecosts, and if either of them or any other Pentecost is reading this, I mean no offense, but are there REALLY that many Pentecosts out there to make that much of a difference?
I don't know if Harold Bloom is a genius. I'm thinking no, but I'm not much of a judge. But he apparently reads a thousand pages of books or more a day. That, at the very least, makes him extremely talented. However, sometimes he doesn't put that talent to the best of use, because it seems like he's compelled to reference EVERYTHING he's read EVER when talking about the Bible, whether it relates or not. Especially Hamlet. My GOD. I know it's like his favorite work or whatever but it does not need to be mentioned EVERY THREE PAGES.
Also, I can't get behind comparing the Tanakh's God to King Lear. God is powerful. The whole point of King Lear is that he isn't.
Reading the book was sometimes frustrating. Bloom's lack of argument and notion of only cursorily having to stick to the topic of the chapter gives the book the overall feel of one of those pot-soaked would-be lunchroom prophets I met in college. Nevertheless, I was kind of glad I read it.
For a better review of Harold Bloom, click here.
Prince Caspian by C.S. Lewis
Eh, it was fun. You know, I can't really think of much that's unique to say about this. I kind of felt about this book the same way as about The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. Cute. Christian symbolism is quite obvious. I enjoyed it. I love bears and badgers. See you next time around for The Voyage of Dawn Treader.
I like C.S. Lewis. The more I learn about him the more I become convinced he doesn't deserve his sometimes-given reputation as one of those Christians. I'll talk about this later.
Magic Knight Rayearth (Omnibus) by CLAMP
I watched the anime quite a long time ago, and then finished it a few years ago. Now I got to read the manga. The translation, especially in the first few pages, seemed really wonky. Very slang-filled and didn't really fit the characters voices as I remembered them in the anime. But after that, the manga got better. Some things made a lot more sense -- I particuarly liked how Presea WASN'T killed by Ascot, because it made Ascot's eventual redemption make a lot more sense. The Fuu/Ferio relationship just being a flirtation also made the fact that the couple never gets together more palatable. Less is more, you know?
The art ... well, I like CLAMP's art in general, but I found a lot of the fight scenes REALLY hard to follow. There's just too much movement-explodey-power shit going on and I couldn't see much of what was happening at all. That I didn't like so much.
Anyway, I'm glad I read it. And of course, the ending is one of the best magical girl story endings ever. I don't know if I like it better than the anime, but there are things I like better. However the anime does have pretty colors ... maybe they're equal.
So, when I went on vacation my plane got delayed. Like, REALLY delayed. Like, so delayed that I was able to read "Alice in Wonderland" in the airport and "Through the Looking-Glass" on the plane. I realized I'd read "Alice in Wonderland" before -- the whole thing. I thought the last version I read was just an abridged version. Anyway ...
I realize just now that this review may be useless because even if you haven't read the books, you've probably seen enough adaptions to know what happens. So is reading the original books of any use? Well, I think so. I think of all of the early "girl goes to magic land" children's authors, Lewis Carrol is the most fun, just because of all the stuff he's willing to try. So instead of just a straight magic fantasy (like, say, Oz) you get some hybrid novel/poetry/math/logic lesson/chess ... thing. It's never boring -- I should say that much. And it's pretty short overall.
Reading Alice as an adult has been kind of neat for me. I think the books scared me a lot as a kid. And I never got why Alice wasn't scared out of her mind either, and acted like no little girl I ever met before. So when I was a kid I didn't like it. As an adult, I still don't believe Alice as a real little girl (although her being a girl having a dream gives it a little more "sense"), but I appreciate so much else in the book - particuarly the clever humor and poetry - that it doesn't bother me. I feel like I can really understand it now.
Not so much for the other book I read ...
Peter and Wendy/Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens/The Blot on Peter Pan by J.M. Barrie
Meanwhile, reading the Peter Pan cycle reminded me why I HATED the Peter Pan story as a kid. I always thought Wendy got a pretty sucky deal in Peter Pan with the whole "I'll be the Lost Boys' mother" thing. I mean, to me that just says you go to a fantasy land just to do CHORES. Oh, and every other girl on the island either ignores you (Tiger Lily), is mean to you (the mermaids) or actively plots your death and destruction (Tinkerbell). Fucking pass, dude. I still think that way.
However, if you're an adult and you want to go back and read one of the "girls go to a magic land" stories, this one is the most worth your time. J.M. Barrie has a ... unique view of childhood. How unique? Well, in one of the last lines of the book he describes children as "gay and innocent and heartless." Heartless. Also, Peter Pan is an absolute selfish psychopath. When the kids are flying to the Neverlands, sometimes they fall asleep in mid-air and start to fall to the earth, and Peter Pan LAUGHS, because he does not understand that they are ABOUT TO DIE. There's a lot of stuff like that in the books. Actually, G.K. Chesterton said the story is really more directed at adults than children, and I have to agree.
The first book, "Peter and Wendy", is basically the story we all know. Kind of. So I won't go into the plot too much. The second is a semi-prequel, which tells the origins of Peter Pan and about how he can fly because he's half bird and how fairies come out at night. There's also another girl in the story, Maimie, who helps out a homely little fairy and they build her a house and also learns not to be mean to her brother. I liked her a lot better than Wendy. The last isn't really a Peter Pan story ... it's this odd sort of biofic about a kid J.M. Barrie knew while he was writing Peter Pan that's kind of funny and clever.
I felt ... kind of nostalgic reading the story. If you're an adult you remember some of what it's like to be a kid, but not with an always-happy eye of innocence. It's really good stuff, in the end, even if I have no wish to go to Neverland.
The Promise by Chaim Potok
I loved this book. I loved the first book in the duology, The Chosen, which is about the growing friendship and growth between an Orthodox Jewish boy and a Hasidic Jewish boy during World War II. This book shows them as adults, and having to deal with a boy who is crazy, like really crazy.
I feel kind of at a loss for words, because I read this review and feel like anything I write would be identical to what she said. With a few exceptions, one is that I like Danny a lot more than she does, although I think that might be a leftover of the first book. (Also, I don't think the first book is so depressing -- the climatic scene redeems it). Reading the first book also puts more of Danny's thoughts on Freud into perspective.
She is SO ABSOLUTELY RIGHT about the female characters. I can only say that, Thank God, Chaim Potok did improve as he continued writing. Asher Lev's mother I remember being a good character, or at the very least more dynamic than the female characters in The Promise. And Potok was able to write women in three dimensions by the time he got to Davita's Harp. But still, SHEESH Rachel was an awfully-done character. I don't think Potok has chauvinistic viewpoints but she really was more of a MacGuffin than an actual character. She had nearly no thoughts of her own. It was almost like Potok went "If I say she reads James Joyce, that means she'll be smart!" without actually showing her to be smart.
The book overall is great, though. I liked how Potok can portray people he disagrees with (like Rav Kalman) as actual, real people and not just evil fundamentalists. And it was nice to be with people I met years ago when I read The Chosen again. I hope reading The Gift of Asher Lev and Old Men at Midnight will be a similar experience.
One final thought: I knew graduate school made people crazy. Whoo-wee.
Jesus and Yahweh: The Names Divine by Harold Bloom
I can hear you, you know. "HAROLD BLOOM?" you say. Why Harold Bloom? Everyone knows he's a jerk who most likely sexually harassed Naomi Wolf. Everyone knows he practically wants to take away our Harry Potter novels and burn them and picks on writers of color or female writers or female writers of color. WHY?
Well, the concept sounded interesting. The idea of a literary critique of Jesus and God and how they are different (which they are). However ... well, Bloom's writing is ... kind of nuts. He doesn't argue things. He just STATES things. And that's a real problem in a book where you're arguing something as incendiary as "The God of the Old Testament is not the God of the new." He has ideas. And they're interesting ideas. The most interesting idea is that the head of the Christian trinity isn't God the Father, but Jesus, as in the New Testament God the Father exists only in relation to the son. "God loves his son, Jesus. God loves the world so much he gives up his only son, which he loves, for the world." It's an interesting concept, but you don't say that as a lapsed Jew without BACKING IT UP. I also think his perception of the world is a little skewed. Especially when he says that the Holy Spirit is becoming the God of America because of the Pentecosts. Now, I've had two very good friends who were Pentecosts, and if either of them or any other Pentecost is reading this, I mean no offense, but are there REALLY that many Pentecosts out there to make that much of a difference?
I don't know if Harold Bloom is a genius. I'm thinking no, but I'm not much of a judge. But he apparently reads a thousand pages of books or more a day. That, at the very least, makes him extremely talented. However, sometimes he doesn't put that talent to the best of use, because it seems like he's compelled to reference EVERYTHING he's read EVER when talking about the Bible, whether it relates or not. Especially Hamlet. My GOD. I know it's like his favorite work or whatever but it does not need to be mentioned EVERY THREE PAGES.
Also, I can't get behind comparing the Tanakh's God to King Lear. God is powerful. The whole point of King Lear is that he isn't.
Reading the book was sometimes frustrating. Bloom's lack of argument and notion of only cursorily having to stick to the topic of the chapter gives the book the overall feel of one of those pot-soaked would-be lunchroom prophets I met in college. Nevertheless, I was kind of glad I read it.
For a better review of Harold Bloom, click here.
Prince Caspian by C.S. Lewis
Eh, it was fun. You know, I can't really think of much that's unique to say about this. I kind of felt about this book the same way as about The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. Cute. Christian symbolism is quite obvious. I enjoyed it. I love bears and badgers. See you next time around for The Voyage of Dawn Treader.
I like C.S. Lewis. The more I learn about him the more I become convinced he doesn't deserve his sometimes-given reputation as one of those Christians. I'll talk about this later.
Magic Knight Rayearth (Omnibus) by CLAMP
I watched the anime quite a long time ago, and then finished it a few years ago. Now I got to read the manga. The translation, especially in the first few pages, seemed really wonky. Very slang-filled and didn't really fit the characters voices as I remembered them in the anime. But after that, the manga got better. Some things made a lot more sense -- I particuarly liked how Presea WASN'T killed by Ascot, because it made Ascot's eventual redemption make a lot more sense. The Fuu/Ferio relationship just being a flirtation also made the fact that the couple never gets together more palatable. Less is more, you know?
The art ... well, I like CLAMP's art in general, but I found a lot of the fight scenes REALLY hard to follow. There's just too much movement-explodey-power shit going on and I couldn't see much of what was happening at all. That I didn't like so much.
Anyway, I'm glad I read it. And of course, the ending is one of the best magical girl story endings ever. I don't know if I like it better than the anime, but there are things I like better. However the anime does have pretty colors ... maybe they're equal.