Finishing "Eclipse" was a relief to me. At this point, I am little over Bella and her twisted relationship. I don't call it twisted because he's a vampire. I call it twisted because she turns too often to guilt-tripping and codependent behaviors. Even the boys' manipulating turns me off.
I don't like how Bella thinks she has power over everyone else's feelings; none of us does. We are all responsible for our own. And all this "I can't live without you" talk is too sappy and nonsensical. Is the author trying to paint a relationship based on "true love"? If so, I think she needs a lesson on it herself. (Not that I know exactly what it is, but it seems like it's less clingy than what's pictured here.)
Another point: I am glad Bella is beginning to glimpse the real repercussions of what might happen if she becomes a vampire. I am surprised that that is not addressed more deeply -- or has not yet been. This willingness to give up her humanness, her "natural" soul, her family, all she knows, for this one man again hints of codependency.
On brighter notes: I am glad to see the author is improving in describing action scenes. In her past books, she's just skipped over them, beginning chapters with Bella waking up after all the action has taken place. And I liked the description of how the werewolves came to be. That story might even make up a novel all its own.
I am somewhat interested what will happen to Bella, Edward and Jacob in the future. But I am not holding my breath.
Final point: When Bella is menstruating, do you think Edward and the rest of the Cullens avoid her? Why has not the author delved into this?
Thursday, September 20
Tuesday, September 11
Some of My thoughts on Eclipse
Sorry. I was on vacation for the last week and a half. Almost everyone I talked to on vacation liked the books. ;) Well everyone liked them but everyone argued about the best ending and about the characters. It was fun to hear other opinions and discuss the book in person. I think that we would have a lively discussion in person. That's one of the things I love about the book. Everyone has different allegiances because she hasn't made anyone a complete monster. Not all werewolves are bad, not all vampires are bad, not all humans are bad and yet each of them do monstrous things at various times.
I loved the relation between the vampires and the werewolves. I hope we will continue to find out more about that in the next book. I thought it was interesting that the werewolves believe they were created as protectors and the vampires simply sees them as volatile monsters. I don't understand the Cullens hatred of them. Especially when they are protecting people. The Cullens should support that. I liked the tenuous relationship that forms between them because they are fighting for the protection of their community(which for the vampires only means Bella).
I liked hearing Rosalie and Jasper's stories. I'm glad that Bella heard them. I still feel that Bella is too young to be making the decisions that she is making. I think her aversion to marriage showed that. I'm glad that in this book she struggled with her decisions and her eyes were opened up a little bit. I'm not convinced that she made the right decision. I can't help feeling the same sadness that Jacob and Rosalie do that Bella is going to give up her mortal life and experiences. I feel like she is eating to Fruit of the Tree of Eternal Life before she gets the chance to live and grow. True, she still will have the chance to grow and change- both Jasper and Edward have- but it takes a lot longer and she will be denied important experiences like the opportunity to have kids and family and friends(she will be limited to only the Cullens). I feel like the more mature person would have chosen the life with Jacob. The life with Edward may seem glamorous and he is a wonderful guy but it is extremely limited. The cons are greater than the pros. I think that Jacob has the potential to be as wonderful as Edward and I think her life would be happier because it would be filled with the people she loves not just the person she loves. With Jacob she could have taken the time to grow up before making a commitment. With Edward she is forced into an immediate decision(that's not his fault). The only reason that she shouldn't choose Jacob is because he didn't imprint with her.
I think that Edward is a drug to Bella. As a vampire he has been described as the perfect predator and part of that is his attractiveness to his prey. It is not something he controls but it is part of who he is. It is why he is so irresistible to her. She is like a drug to him too. They tend to be self-destructive together because of their two different worlds.
Ideally Edward would find a way to become Mortal and then Bella could truly choose. Then she wouldn't be blinded by the rush to stay young and beautiful. Then she wouldn't be blinded by his amazing good looks and vampire pheromones. Then she could enjoy all of life's experiences with him by her side. Then she would be making a true life decision rather than the fantasy one.
I loved the relation between the vampires and the werewolves. I hope we will continue to find out more about that in the next book. I thought it was interesting that the werewolves believe they were created as protectors and the vampires simply sees them as volatile monsters. I don't understand the Cullens hatred of them. Especially when they are protecting people. The Cullens should support that. I liked the tenuous relationship that forms between them because they are fighting for the protection of their community(which for the vampires only means Bella).
I liked hearing Rosalie and Jasper's stories. I'm glad that Bella heard them. I still feel that Bella is too young to be making the decisions that she is making. I think her aversion to marriage showed that. I'm glad that in this book she struggled with her decisions and her eyes were opened up a little bit. I'm not convinced that she made the right decision. I can't help feeling the same sadness that Jacob and Rosalie do that Bella is going to give up her mortal life and experiences. I feel like she is eating to Fruit of the Tree of Eternal Life before she gets the chance to live and grow. True, she still will have the chance to grow and change- both Jasper and Edward have- but it takes a lot longer and she will be denied important experiences like the opportunity to have kids and family and friends(she will be limited to only the Cullens). I feel like the more mature person would have chosen the life with Jacob. The life with Edward may seem glamorous and he is a wonderful guy but it is extremely limited. The cons are greater than the pros. I think that Jacob has the potential to be as wonderful as Edward and I think her life would be happier because it would be filled with the people she loves not just the person she loves. With Jacob she could have taken the time to grow up before making a commitment. With Edward she is forced into an immediate decision(that's not his fault). The only reason that she shouldn't choose Jacob is because he didn't imprint with her.
I think that Edward is a drug to Bella. As a vampire he has been described as the perfect predator and part of that is his attractiveness to his prey. It is not something he controls but it is part of who he is. It is why he is so irresistible to her. She is like a drug to him too. They tend to be self-destructive together because of their two different worlds.
Ideally Edward would find a way to become Mortal and then Bella could truly choose. Then she wouldn't be blinded by the rush to stay young and beautiful. Then she wouldn't be blinded by his amazing good looks and vampire pheromones. Then she could enjoy all of life's experiences with him by her side. Then she would be making a true life decision rather than the fantasy one.
Monday, September 10
Not quite finished
I had to first read the other 2 books in this series. I am still working on Eclipse. I will post when I am done. I'm trying not to peek ahead at everyone's postings here!
Danielle
Danielle
Sunday, September 9
Eclipse
Ladies,
There are so many things I like about Eclipse. One is the title. How cool is it that Edward, the vampire, the cold creature of the night, eclipses Jacob who was Bella's sun! (see pages 599-600--Jacob, "He's like a drug for you. . . I would have been the air, the sun." Bella, "I used to think of you [as my personal sun]. You balanced out the clouds. . . ." Jacob, "The clouds I can handle. But I can't fight with an eclipse.") No sun can. The literary technique is just cool.
Second, as much as Bella's indecision about Jacob and Edward drove me crazy (she really acts like a self-centered teeny-bopper at times), I think I would have been madder if her decision to become a vampire had been made easily. This book really makes her LOOK: She is going to give up the ability to have children (Rosalie's story). That is HUGE. She is going to have to learn to control incredibly strong desires to do horrible things (Jasper's story and the new vampire, Bree). She really has to look at this. I know she dismisses it, but Edward is concerned about her SOUL. Her indecision finally makes me believe that she really understands that she is going to have to SACRIFICE something to be with Edward (page 589). If she hadn't valued Jacob, it would have been no sacrifice.
Third, Bella finally grows up and begins to think of others. Her decision to have a wedding for her parents and for Alice, her decision to be clear and honest with Jacob even if it hurts her, and most important, HER decision to wait to have sex until she and Edward are married (she finally cares about HIS soul page 620) demonstrates some maturity. She is going to need it to become a Cullen. (I know that the descriptions of her physical attraction to Edward are breath-taking and that is not so good for the target audience. I was grateful that Bella finally made the right choice. I can only hope that the teen-age target audience got the point that she was really making the BETTER choice no matter how strong her desires were.)
So, even though it drove me crazy, I think the conflict of Bella trying to figure out who she really is and who she really wants to become was important. (The two magnets she was trying to force together were two parts of herself, p. 608)
For those of you who don’t know, my husband, Rod, read the book as well (as did two sons and two daughters-in-law). We now have a family blog about this book—great conversations. I wanted to include Rod’s idea that the best way for this story to end would be for Edward to become mortal. Meyer hints at this on page 273 when Edward says, "If there were any way for me to become human for you--no matter what the price was, I would pay it." Interesting thought. (At that point in the book, he was the one making the sacrifices.)
Finally, KT . . . I really appreciated your sarcasm. You are right. Bella really doesn't appreciate what she has. Edward's willingness to sacrifice everything to see that she is truly happy is so intense. I can't wait to read the book from his perspective (if Meyer still plans to write it). I also look forward (I think) to the sequal, New Horizons (?) I look forward to reading more of your thoughts.
There are so many things I like about Eclipse. One is the title. How cool is it that Edward, the vampire, the cold creature of the night, eclipses Jacob who was Bella's sun! (see pages 599-600--Jacob, "He's like a drug for you. . . I would have been the air, the sun." Bella, "I used to think of you [as my personal sun]. You balanced out the clouds. . . ." Jacob, "The clouds I can handle. But I can't fight with an eclipse.") No sun can. The literary technique is just cool.
Second, as much as Bella's indecision about Jacob and Edward drove me crazy (she really acts like a self-centered teeny-bopper at times), I think I would have been madder if her decision to become a vampire had been made easily. This book really makes her LOOK: She is going to give up the ability to have children (Rosalie's story). That is HUGE. She is going to have to learn to control incredibly strong desires to do horrible things (Jasper's story and the new vampire, Bree). She really has to look at this. I know she dismisses it, but Edward is concerned about her SOUL. Her indecision finally makes me believe that she really understands that she is going to have to SACRIFICE something to be with Edward (page 589). If she hadn't valued Jacob, it would have been no sacrifice.
Third, Bella finally grows up and begins to think of others. Her decision to have a wedding for her parents and for Alice, her decision to be clear and honest with Jacob even if it hurts her, and most important, HER decision to wait to have sex until she and Edward are married (she finally cares about HIS soul page 620) demonstrates some maturity. She is going to need it to become a Cullen. (I know that the descriptions of her physical attraction to Edward are breath-taking and that is not so good for the target audience. I was grateful that Bella finally made the right choice. I can only hope that the teen-age target audience got the point that she was really making the BETTER choice no matter how strong her desires were.)
So, even though it drove me crazy, I think the conflict of Bella trying to figure out who she really is and who she really wants to become was important. (The two magnets she was trying to force together were two parts of herself, p. 608)
For those of you who don’t know, my husband, Rod, read the book as well (as did two sons and two daughters-in-law). We now have a family blog about this book—great conversations. I wanted to include Rod’s idea that the best way for this story to end would be for Edward to become mortal. Meyer hints at this on page 273 when Edward says, "If there were any way for me to become human for you--no matter what the price was, I would pay it." Interesting thought. (At that point in the book, he was the one making the sacrifices.)
Finally, KT . . . I really appreciated your sarcasm. You are right. Bella really doesn't appreciate what she has. Edward's willingness to sacrifice everything to see that she is truly happy is so intense. I can't wait to read the book from his perspective (if Meyer still plans to write it). I also look forward (I think) to the sequal, New Horizons (?) I look forward to reading more of your thoughts.
Thursday, September 6
I loved Eclipse!
I feel so warped being taken to Forks for 3 consecutive super-long books. It's been almost a week and I still can't snap out of that world. Once I think I am back to normal, I'll run into someone that has read all the books and get all wrapped up in it all over again.
Seriously, something is wrong with me! I relate to Bella on too many levels. I read Katie's post on Monday and thought, "Man, I can't write a review now! I've felt that kind of love for two people, having to choose one. She'll think I'm a total bimbo!" So there you have it. Once upon a time, I did have those deep torn feelings that Bella had for two special people (and similarly, they were both as understanding of my feelings for the other party - that good-bye scene with Jacob tore me up). Maybe that is why I am so warped by these books. It's taken me to a place I miss and don't want to think about at the same time. It's so surreal I can't even begin to explain myself.
So anyway, I appreciate Laurenda
Seriously, something is wrong with me! I relate to Bella on too many levels. I read Katie's post on Monday and thought, "Man, I can't write a review now! I've felt that kind of love for two people, having to choose one. She'll think I'm a total bimbo!" So there you have it. Once upon a time, I did have those deep torn feelings that Bella had for two special people (and similarly, they were both as understanding of my feelings for the other party - that good-bye scene with Jacob tore me up). Maybe that is why I am so warped by these books. It's taken me to a place I miss and don't want to think about at the same time. It's so surreal I can't even begin to explain myself.
So anyway, I appreciate Laurenda
Tuesday, September 4
Eclipse...
Hello Ladies!
Okay, I have to start off by saying that I read this book like a crazy woman when it first came out and was fit to be tied that I had no one to talk to about it when I was done! lol. So, needless to say, I'm glad Katie chose this one (though I did read about a third-ish of Calamity Physics and its end, for which I can review it with this: GET TO THE POINT, Blue!!!!! Yegads. That girl cited more sources than half the academic history journals I had to read during grad school!!!! It dragged down the book and the story so much that you really didn't care who was killed and for what reason. I DID however, find the "final exam" at the end of the book funny. And that's my review of that book.)
Alrighty then. Eclipse. I, too, really liked this book because I was so curious as to how things were going to turn out and I like Stephenie Meyer, as a person (I've seen a couple of the interviews she's done for Borders, GMA, etc.) and as a writer.
That being said, man was I miffed when I was done reading it the first time (I'm currently re-reading it)!!!! In fact, I was like, "ARGHHHHH!" I felt that SM had made Jacob too much of a character in this book, had neutered Edward, and had notched up the whine factor for "poor" Bella. In fact, Bella was so guilt ridden and angst filled that at times I wanted both Edward and Jacob to leave her alone so she could find a good therapist!!! The girl, seriously, has issues (more than just hanging out with vampires and werewolves). She is too much a people pleaser for me to really feel that she knows what she wants at the tender age of 18...and this is spoken from a mega-people pleaser who is still reeling from an unfortunate photo event between my divorced parents at my wedding.
So, here's some of the things that I didn't like: I didn't like the fact that Jacob kissed Bella into recognizing she really LURVED him too. I should have known when we had the Wuthering Heights analogies that NO GOOD was going to happen to this little love triangle. But seriously, he had to kiss her before she realized she LOVED him? WHAT was THAT about????? I think that she kissed him and actually had, quite literally, a heated response; I don't know that I would classify that as love. As Katie said, WAY too Harlequin Romance for me. Once again, if Bella was so out of touch with her feelings for him that she had to be forced into admitting them...THERAPY! That's what she needs before she really commits to EITHER of them! And truthfully, I couldn't wrap my mind around the fact that Jacob was only 16, though he looked 25, and wasn't being considered a near date-rapist when he was forcing her to kiss him. That wasn't romantic to me at all. Yes, he acted foolish like a 16 year old in love for the first time, but the fact that his character is physically so strong made all that too creepy for me somehow. Just as Edward was seriously over-protective of Bella and often over-reacted, Jacob came off as some bad cologne that was sprayed on too strongly for my personal taste.
And Edward...of the three, I probably had the least problem with his character because I felt that he at least made some emotional progress. You really do have to allow the person you love to chose and he did that. I'm glad that he stuck to his guns about his morality (being that kind of guy). I'm still a little put off about Bella being so opposed to marriage, and at the end, I wanted to see her really embracing the idea of being married to Edward as opposed to the idea of having the wedding to say good-bye to friends/family and to please Alice and Edward.
Bella...was shrill and whiny to me. In Twilight, though she seemed klutzy, at least she seemed strong emotionally. Now, I realize that she's been through alot. But her character kind of regressed to me. I was often rolling my eyes at her antics. As I'm typing this, I think that the word that keeps coming to mind was that Bella was consciously selfish. She knew it and refers to it several times in the book, but still chooses that selfishness. Maybe that's what bugged me. I understand that in the end she was supposedly choosing, but I was mad at her character for agreeing with Jacob that he was more like "sun" and "natural" stuff, whereas her love and need for Edward was likened to a "drug". ugh.
I should mention that I'm writing this practically a MONTH after the book came out. Since I first read it, I've lurked on the Twilight Lexicon to see what other readers thought and I've read SM's website. She recently posted some FAQs about Eclipse that she heard repeatedly on her book signing tour, and she says that Jacob did NOT imprint on Bella. She agreed, too, that Jacob was playing dirty with Bella because in his mind, he was not only trying to win his first love's heart, but trying to save her life. And Bella had to go through all that so, as Katie and Karen had discussed, so she could see and recognize her choices and truly make the one that she wanted. All that extra input has been helping in this second reading, but still...I find myself rolling my eyes.
All that being said, I actually did like the book--quite a bit. I enjoyed that once again, I could totally submit and enter the world of Forks quite happily. I liked all the new things that we learned about Rosalie and Jasper, warring vampires and how to combat them, and about the werewolves in general, and I thought the conversation/negotiations about waiting until marriage was part of a relationship, especially when you have two moral compasses/generations at work. And most importantly, eyes rolling aside, I'm still excited about the next book. A year seems like a long time.
Great choice, Katie!!!! :)
Okay, I have to start off by saying that I read this book like a crazy woman when it first came out and was fit to be tied that I had no one to talk to about it when I was done! lol. So, needless to say, I'm glad Katie chose this one (though I did read about a third-ish of Calamity Physics and its end, for which I can review it with this: GET TO THE POINT, Blue!!!!! Yegads. That girl cited more sources than half the academic history journals I had to read during grad school!!!! It dragged down the book and the story so much that you really didn't care who was killed and for what reason. I DID however, find the "final exam" at the end of the book funny. And that's my review of that book.)
Alrighty then. Eclipse. I, too, really liked this book because I was so curious as to how things were going to turn out and I like Stephenie Meyer, as a person (I've seen a couple of the interviews she's done for Borders, GMA, etc.) and as a writer.
That being said, man was I miffed when I was done reading it the first time (I'm currently re-reading it)!!!! In fact, I was like, "ARGHHHHH!" I felt that SM had made Jacob too much of a character in this book, had neutered Edward, and had notched up the whine factor for "poor" Bella. In fact, Bella was so guilt ridden and angst filled that at times I wanted both Edward and Jacob to leave her alone so she could find a good therapist!!! The girl, seriously, has issues (more than just hanging out with vampires and werewolves). She is too much a people pleaser for me to really feel that she knows what she wants at the tender age of 18...and this is spoken from a mega-people pleaser who is still reeling from an unfortunate photo event between my divorced parents at my wedding.
So, here's some of the things that I didn't like: I didn't like the fact that Jacob kissed Bella into recognizing she really LURVED him too. I should have known when we had the Wuthering Heights analogies that NO GOOD was going to happen to this little love triangle. But seriously, he had to kiss her before she realized she LOVED him? WHAT was THAT about????? I think that she kissed him and actually had, quite literally, a heated response; I don't know that I would classify that as love. As Katie said, WAY too Harlequin Romance for me. Once again, if Bella was so out of touch with her feelings for him that she had to be forced into admitting them...THERAPY! That's what she needs before she really commits to EITHER of them! And truthfully, I couldn't wrap my mind around the fact that Jacob was only 16, though he looked 25, and wasn't being considered a near date-rapist when he was forcing her to kiss him. That wasn't romantic to me at all. Yes, he acted foolish like a 16 year old in love for the first time, but the fact that his character is physically so strong made all that too creepy for me somehow. Just as Edward was seriously over-protective of Bella and often over-reacted, Jacob came off as some bad cologne that was sprayed on too strongly for my personal taste.
And Edward...of the three, I probably had the least problem with his character because I felt that he at least made some emotional progress. You really do have to allow the person you love to chose and he did that. I'm glad that he stuck to his guns about his morality (being that kind of guy). I'm still a little put off about Bella being so opposed to marriage, and at the end, I wanted to see her really embracing the idea of being married to Edward as opposed to the idea of having the wedding to say good-bye to friends/family and to please Alice and Edward.
Bella...was shrill and whiny to me. In Twilight, though she seemed klutzy, at least she seemed strong emotionally. Now, I realize that she's been through alot. But her character kind of regressed to me. I was often rolling my eyes at her antics. As I'm typing this, I think that the word that keeps coming to mind was that Bella was consciously selfish. She knew it and refers to it several times in the book, but still chooses that selfishness. Maybe that's what bugged me. I understand that in the end she was supposedly choosing, but I was mad at her character for agreeing with Jacob that he was more like "sun" and "natural" stuff, whereas her love and need for Edward was likened to a "drug". ugh.
I should mention that I'm writing this practically a MONTH after the book came out. Since I first read it, I've lurked on the Twilight Lexicon to see what other readers thought and I've read SM's website. She recently posted some FAQs about Eclipse that she heard repeatedly on her book signing tour, and she says that Jacob did NOT imprint on Bella. She agreed, too, that Jacob was playing dirty with Bella because in his mind, he was not only trying to win his first love's heart, but trying to save her life. And Bella had to go through all that so, as Katie and Karen had discussed, so she could see and recognize her choices and truly make the one that she wanted. All that extra input has been helping in this second reading, but still...I find myself rolling my eyes.
All that being said, I actually did like the book--quite a bit. I enjoyed that once again, I could totally submit and enter the world of Forks quite happily. I liked all the new things that we learned about Rosalie and Jasper, warring vampires and how to combat them, and about the werewolves in general, and I thought the conversation/negotiations about waiting until marriage was part of a relationship, especially when you have two moral compasses/generations at work. And most importantly, eyes rolling aside, I'm still excited about the next book. A year seems like a long time.
Great choice, Katie!!!! :)
Sunday, September 2
Eclipse
I loved Eclipse, but I have serious problems with it. I'm not sure I liked it as much as Twilight and New Moon. Bella seemed much more whiny to me, and more wishy-washy. She seemed much stronger in Twilight. Maybe the trauma caused by Edward's leaving in New Moon has had a more profound effect than I thought.
Maybe I'm just a bitter old lady, but, poor Bella, choosing between two guys (please note the dripping sarcasm), and making them both suffer. Is that realistic? Or is it more like a harlequin novel? I had big problems with this. I spoke with Karen about it, and she mentioned that Bella has like Jacob in order for her to have a choice, to CHOOSE life as a vampire with full understanding of what she's giving up. I can kind of see that. However, at the same time, how can Edward be her soul mate if she is in love with Jacob...if Edward's her soul mate, how can a part of her (even a small part of her) prefer Jacob and wish that it was his arms she wanted to be in.
Laurenda sent me a link to a couple of interviews with Stephenie Meyer to help me come to terms with this Edward/Jacob dilemma. One discussion took place at a Borders in Sunset Hills, MO. To quote Meyer:
"If she (Bella) hadn't fully explored the idea of staying human, I don't think I'd be a very responsible parent - and I sort of feel like I'm her mom - to let her go ahead and choose to be with Edward without really looking at all the options." So, Karen hit Meyer's reasoning dead on. Still doesn't mean I like it.
I didn't like Jacob comparing Eward to a drug, and himself to the air and sun (yes, he's a teenage boy and has a lot of growing up to do).
Based on something my niece said, I want to pose a question. She asked whether Jacob would imprint and if he does, how will Bella react. My question is, what if he already has imprinted, and it's Bella? We only have Jacob's word that he hasn't imprinted. If he's imprinted with Bella, and he knows she's in love with Edward, would he tell her? I know he's had no shame in manipulating her in other ways, but imprinting is very serious to werewolves, and would that rejection be too much?
Maybe I'm just a bitter old lady, but, poor Bella, choosing between two guys (please note the dripping sarcasm), and making them both suffer. Is that realistic? Or is it more like a harlequin novel? I had big problems with this. I spoke with Karen about it, and she mentioned that Bella has like Jacob in order for her to have a choice, to CHOOSE life as a vampire with full understanding of what she's giving up. I can kind of see that. However, at the same time, how can Edward be her soul mate if she is in love with Jacob...if Edward's her soul mate, how can a part of her (even a small part of her) prefer Jacob and wish that it was his arms she wanted to be in.
Laurenda sent me a link to a couple of interviews with Stephenie Meyer to help me come to terms with this Edward/Jacob dilemma. One discussion took place at a Borders in Sunset Hills, MO. To quote Meyer:
"If she (Bella) hadn't fully explored the idea of staying human, I don't think I'd be a very responsible parent - and I sort of feel like I'm her mom - to let her go ahead and choose to be with Edward without really looking at all the options." So, Karen hit Meyer's reasoning dead on. Still doesn't mean I like it.
I didn't like Jacob comparing Eward to a drug, and himself to the air and sun (yes, he's a teenage boy and has a lot of growing up to do).
Based on something my niece said, I want to pose a question. She asked whether Jacob would imprint and if he does, how will Bella react. My question is, what if he already has imprinted, and it's Bella? We only have Jacob's word that he hasn't imprinted. If he's imprinted with Bella, and he knows she's in love with Edward, would he tell her? I know he's had no shame in manipulating her in other ways, but imprinting is very serious to werewolves, and would that rejection be too much?
Monday, August 13
The Late Stranger Review
I can't say anything more intelligent about this book that hasn't already been said. Thanks for your reviews, everyone.
I didn't enjoy the book... I was quite confused with this character and his lack of emotion. I am very grateful the book was short so I didn't have to read 500 pages of gloom and facts about his surroundings that didn't matter much.
I am curious about Camus' other works... he did win a Nobel Peace Prize for Literature, so some of his writings MUST be good and uplifting, right?
I didn't enjoy the book... I was quite confused with this character and his lack of emotion. I am very grateful the book was short so I didn't have to read 500 pages of gloom and facts about his surroundings that didn't matter much.
I am curious about Camus' other works... he did win a Nobel Peace Prize for Literature, so some of his writings MUST be good and uplifting, right?
Tuesday, July 24
The Strange Stranger
I took this opportunity to read The Stranger in the original French. It was still very strange. Maybe it was all my English Lit classes in high school, but I kept asking myself "who is the stranger?" Does it refer to the Arab killed on the beach? Or does it refer to M. Mersault? If it does refer to Mersault, who is he a stranger to? To the court, to society, or to himself? I think he is a stranger to himself. The only opinion or attitude that he clings to is that he has no regret for killing. How many times throughout the book did he say "ca m'est egal?", or "I don't care." Do you want to get married? I don't care. Do you want to write this letter for me? I don't care. I was SOOOO frustrated with his attitude of "I don't care." Coupled with "I don't care" was his desire to make others happy or understand him. He had no part in what his friend, Raymond, was doing, but Mersault states several times that he did things to make Raymond happy.
I was surprised to read that "[a]lthough he is often associated with existentialism, Camus preferred to be known as a man and a thinker, rather than as a member of a school or ideology. He preferred persons over ideas. In an interview in 1945, Camus rejected any ideological associations: “No, I am not an existentialist.. Sartre and I are always surprised to see our names linked....”
The writing the "L'etranger" seemed very choppy: (I'm translating) "I ate fast and had coffee. Then I went home and slept a little bit...I wanted to smoke. It was late." Just factual statements, emphasizing the lack of emotion.
How odd is his line after killing the Arab (again, translating): "I understood that I had destroyed the balance of the day." Just weird. I did mark several pages that either had beautiful writing, or just strange occurrences.
I like how Camus described the friend or Mersault's mom at the beginning - who was crying but his face was so wrinkled, tears couldn't flow down. Or, at that fatal beach how the sun breaks into shards when hitting the sand. Just fascinating.
There's a whole paragraph that I found interesting, when Mersault is in prison: "I didn't understand why I was deprived of [smoking]. Later I understood that this was part of punishment. But at this moment I was used to not smoking, so this punishment no longer was punishment for me."
I didn't feel sorry for the protagonist - I was just confused that he couldn't understand what was going on around him. I'm all for being a non-conformist, being yourself, being original, but never to the extent that morals and laws no longer pertain to me.
My review is probably as fractured as the book. I can't say I liked it, but I'm glad Danielle chose it. Thanks!!
I was surprised to read that "[a]lthough he is often associated with existentialism, Camus preferred to be known as a man and a thinker, rather than as a member of a school or ideology. He preferred persons over ideas. In an interview in 1945, Camus rejected any ideological associations: “No, I am not an existentialist.. Sartre and I are always surprised to see our names linked....”
The writing the "L'etranger" seemed very choppy: (I'm translating) "I ate fast and had coffee. Then I went home and slept a little bit...I wanted to smoke. It was late." Just factual statements, emphasizing the lack of emotion.
How odd is his line after killing the Arab (again, translating): "I understood that I had destroyed the balance of the day." Just weird. I did mark several pages that either had beautiful writing, or just strange occurrences.
I like how Camus described the friend or Mersault's mom at the beginning - who was crying but his face was so wrinkled, tears couldn't flow down. Or, at that fatal beach how the sun breaks into shards when hitting the sand. Just fascinating.
There's a whole paragraph that I found interesting, when Mersault is in prison: "I didn't understand why I was deprived of [smoking]. Later I understood that this was part of punishment. But at this moment I was used to not smoking, so this punishment no longer was punishment for me."
I didn't feel sorry for the protagonist - I was just confused that he couldn't understand what was going on around him. I'm all for being a non-conformist, being yourself, being original, but never to the extent that morals and laws no longer pertain to me.
My review is probably as fractured as the book. I can't say I liked it, but I'm glad Danielle chose it. Thanks!!
Thursday, July 19
Amorality?
I felt like The Stranger exemplifies a prevailing snobbery in academia. It is an attitude that nothing in this life matters and those that try to believe in any higher order or in the case of Camus any order at all are fools. At first I wasn't sure if Camus was being sarcastic or if he truly believed that nothing matters in life. So I looked it up on Sparknotes and he was being serious.
I think his book contradicts itself. According to Camus, to quote sparknotes, "Though The Stranger is a work of fiction, it contains a strong resonance of Camus’s philosophical notion of absurdity. In his essays, Camus asserts that individual lives and human existence in general have no rational meaning or order. However, because people have difficulty accepting this notion, they constantly attempt to identify or create rational structure and meaning in their lives. The term “absurdity” describes humanity’s futile attempt to find rational order where none exists." Meursault is irrational and amoral. The world around him however is not. As far as I can see the world around him, except for his friends, acted rationally and morally in response to his actions. Everyone is appropriately shocked at his lack of feeling. Contrary to Camus, I do not believe that their shock comes from the fact that they are less enlightened than Meursault. I believe that they are more enlightened than him. They understand the importance of connections and feelings. I related to the shock of the magistrate at his lack of an explanation for his actions. I was annoyed with Meursault for never choosing his actions. He claims to be amoral but I don't believe in amorality. I believe in choice and accountability of actions. Meursault is a wimp. He lets life happen to him and then is surprised (however briefly- he did not expect to be convicted) about the outcome. I can respect him having the belief that nothing really matters but I prefer it Hemingway style where you make up your own code of behavior because people still matter. This quote of his drove me nuts (it is Meursault reflecting on talking with his lawyer about his crime): "He left looking angry. I wished I could have made him stay, to explain that I wanted things between us to be good, not so that he could defend me better but, if I can put it this way, good in a natural way. Mostly, I could tell, I made him uncomfortable. He didn't understand me, and he was sort of holding it against me. I felt the urge to reassure him that I was like everybody else, just like everybody else. But really there wasn't much point, and I gave up the idea out of laziness. " To me it sums up Meursault. He just wants to feel good ("I explained to him that my nature was such that my physical needs often got in the way of my feelings") and he is too lazy to do anything. He also thinks that he is normal and perhaps better than normal for his enlightenment. I think the book proves that he is not like everyone else as he is trying to claim. Very few people understand him. I feel sorry for him.
I first began to question Meursault as a narrator when he didn't notice that the nurse with his mother's coffin was missing her nose. That's when I thought that maybe Camus was being sarcastic. I was sad when I realized he wasn't. But I think his book still works as proof that his theories on life are unworkable in real life. Order does exist in this world. Truthfully it is much more ordered than we realize. Humans are unpredictable and volatile and often irrational but the whole universe is not such.
I think his book contradicts itself. According to Camus, to quote sparknotes, "Though The Stranger is a work of fiction, it contains a strong resonance of Camus’s philosophical notion of absurdity. In his essays, Camus asserts that individual lives and human existence in general have no rational meaning or order. However, because people have difficulty accepting this notion, they constantly attempt to identify or create rational structure and meaning in their lives. The term “absurdity” describes humanity’s futile attempt to find rational order where none exists." Meursault is irrational and amoral. The world around him however is not. As far as I can see the world around him, except for his friends, acted rationally and morally in response to his actions. Everyone is appropriately shocked at his lack of feeling. Contrary to Camus, I do not believe that their shock comes from the fact that they are less enlightened than Meursault. I believe that they are more enlightened than him. They understand the importance of connections and feelings. I related to the shock of the magistrate at his lack of an explanation for his actions. I was annoyed with Meursault for never choosing his actions. He claims to be amoral but I don't believe in amorality. I believe in choice and accountability of actions. Meursault is a wimp. He lets life happen to him and then is surprised (however briefly- he did not expect to be convicted) about the outcome. I can respect him having the belief that nothing really matters but I prefer it Hemingway style where you make up your own code of behavior because people still matter. This quote of his drove me nuts (it is Meursault reflecting on talking with his lawyer about his crime): "He left looking angry. I wished I could have made him stay, to explain that I wanted things between us to be good, not so that he could defend me better but, if I can put it this way, good in a natural way. Mostly, I could tell, I made him uncomfortable. He didn't understand me, and he was sort of holding it against me. I felt the urge to reassure him that I was like everybody else, just like everybody else. But really there wasn't much point, and I gave up the idea out of laziness. " To me it sums up Meursault. He just wants to feel good ("I explained to him that my nature was such that my physical needs often got in the way of my feelings") and he is too lazy to do anything. He also thinks that he is normal and perhaps better than normal for his enlightenment. I think the book proves that he is not like everyone else as he is trying to claim. Very few people understand him. I feel sorry for him.
I first began to question Meursault as a narrator when he didn't notice that the nurse with his mother's coffin was missing her nose. That's when I thought that maybe Camus was being sarcastic. I was sad when I realized he wasn't. But I think his book still works as proof that his theories on life are unworkable in real life. Order does exist in this world. Truthfully it is much more ordered than we realize. Humans are unpredictable and volatile and often irrational but the whole universe is not such.
The Stranger...
Hello ladies:
I have to say that I have not read this months book...my apologies, but I am very interested to read all that you have to say about it.
I did go and listen to the bit on Diane Rehm's show and it sounded interesting. I was trying to understand better exestential (sp.) literature, and I really wasn't getting it. I guess my brain is too caught up in the lighter fair...ie, Harry Potter or something similar. What to do, what to do?
I do love reading your opinions...thanks for sharing!
Michelle
I have to say that I have not read this months book...my apologies, but I am very interested to read all that you have to say about it.
I did go and listen to the bit on Diane Rehm's show and it sounded interesting. I was trying to understand better exestential (sp.) literature, and I really wasn't getting it. I guess my brain is too caught up in the lighter fair...ie, Harry Potter or something similar. What to do, what to do?
I do love reading your opinions...thanks for sharing!
Michelle
'Strange' Days
Hello ladies. If you made it through The Stranger, I would like to thank you. I know it was very different from the last book we read, and I for one had expectations that were not met.
I chose this book because I'd heard about it through one of my favorite radio shows on NPR, the Diane Rehm show. The discussion on the show, lead by the highly respected host, piqued my curiosity. Though I do not regret taking the time to read it, I wish I could say I thoroughly enjoyed it.
The main player, Meursault, was hard -- if not impossible -- to warm up to. He didn't seem to have the "normal" human emotions that I -- as a woman -- like to recognize in others. I was reminded of those old movies from the '40s, where the men drink martinis and the women wear hourglass outfits and say the exact right thing all the time. So prescribed and robotic -- everyone filling his to role to a T and showing no great emotion.
Contributing to this robotic life-view was the fact that Meursault was friends with that girlfriend-beater. This friendship, coupled with the fact that he actually wrote that letter for him, just stunned me. Why would he be friends with such a man? Was he supposed to be this all-accepting, nonjudmental, emotionless sort of superhuman?
On the other hand, I found myself feeling sorry for our hero, especially when he was in the courtroom. All the spectators looked at him like he was a monster, when he merely viewed life differently from them. I relate him to an autistic person, who just hasn't the capacity to express feelings in the same manner the "rest of us" do.
The climactic scene at the end was almost a relief, as it brought this rush of feeling and sheer humanity to the book. I guess the author meant us to feel the difference. Like water tastes better when we are thirsty.
After finishing the book, I listened again to the radio show, which reminded me this was an second-generation existentialist book. According to a guest on the show, existentialism has three major questions:
1. Can we trust reason?
2. What are we responsible for, if anything, as humans?
3. Is there a meaning that transcends history?
For someone who seeks meaning in everything, I found it hard to attach meaning to practically anything in this book because the storytelling was disjointed and dry. I think this prevented me from connecting it to anything real. If that is the point of the book, then it worked on me.
This book did not lead me to study existentialism to any great degree. One thought on religion/faith, though. The priest came all the time to talk with him in his cell. Meursault refused to see him. I have to say I see some sort of valour or honor in Meursault's sticking with his own beliefs (or lack thereof). As I read once somewhere: Faith is a process, not an event. Had Meursault converted "on his death bed," so to speak, it might take some of the "meaning" out of the act. (I've always wondered if people who give their lives to God on their death beds are just acting on fear rather than a conscious decision. I see faith as something that helps me through this life, not the next.)
I chose this book because I'd heard about it through one of my favorite radio shows on NPR, the Diane Rehm show. The discussion on the show, lead by the highly respected host, piqued my curiosity. Though I do not regret taking the time to read it, I wish I could say I thoroughly enjoyed it.
The main player, Meursault, was hard -- if not impossible -- to warm up to. He didn't seem to have the "normal" human emotions that I -- as a woman -- like to recognize in others. I was reminded of those old movies from the '40s, where the men drink martinis and the women wear hourglass outfits and say the exact right thing all the time. So prescribed and robotic -- everyone filling his to role to a T and showing no great emotion.
Contributing to this robotic life-view was the fact that Meursault was friends with that girlfriend-beater. This friendship, coupled with the fact that he actually wrote that letter for him, just stunned me. Why would he be friends with such a man? Was he supposed to be this all-accepting, nonjudmental, emotionless sort of superhuman?
On the other hand, I found myself feeling sorry for our hero, especially when he was in the courtroom. All the spectators looked at him like he was a monster, when he merely viewed life differently from them. I relate him to an autistic person, who just hasn't the capacity to express feelings in the same manner the "rest of us" do.
The climactic scene at the end was almost a relief, as it brought this rush of feeling and sheer humanity to the book. I guess the author meant us to feel the difference. Like water tastes better when we are thirsty.
After finishing the book, I listened again to the radio show, which reminded me this was an second-generation existentialist book. According to a guest on the show, existentialism has three major questions:
1. Can we trust reason?
2. What are we responsible for, if anything, as humans?
3. Is there a meaning that transcends history?
For someone who seeks meaning in everything, I found it hard to attach meaning to practically anything in this book because the storytelling was disjointed and dry. I think this prevented me from connecting it to anything real. If that is the point of the book, then it worked on me.
This book did not lead me to study existentialism to any great degree. One thought on religion/faith, though. The priest came all the time to talk with him in his cell. Meursault refused to see him. I have to say I see some sort of valour or honor in Meursault's sticking with his own beliefs (or lack thereof). As I read once somewhere: Faith is a process, not an event. Had Meursault converted "on his death bed," so to speak, it might take some of the "meaning" out of the act. (I've always wondered if people who give their lives to God on their death beds are just acting on fear rather than a conscious decision. I see faith as something that helps me through this life, not the next.)
Monday, July 9
Hi Ladies! (for some reason, Blogger wouldn't let me post a title...hmmmm)
I've tried not to read any posts/remarks, so sorry if this sounds repetitive. :)
First, I have to say that I'd read "Zippy" right before bed, so I'd often fall asleep with that memoir-like narrative voice in my head, which was pretty surreal, let me tell you. It also made me haul out my own journal and write a few entries (I think I last wrote in it a year ago!!! egads!), so if for nothing else, I really appreciate reading "Zippy" for that reason alone!
Overall, I really enjoyed the book. I was INCREDIBLY moved by the story in the second chapter, I think, where she found a letter her mother had written in her baby book, concerning her illness when Zippy was 5 months old and the friends drove down from Gary, IN, so that her mother could sleep, and that they took her to the doctor and there were only 26 antibiotics (!!!!! Thinking about this now, after this past week when all three of my kids came down with strep throat and I just feel so blessed!) and the resident randomly picked the right one and Zippy survived the night after her mother turned the whole thing over to the Lord. And then I busted out laughing when she noted that after Zippy started talking, her mother wrote that all she had to say was "Please God, give that child some hair," or something like that. CRACKED me up.
I also laughed about her siblings telling her that she was adopted, because (true confession time) I remember telling my younger brother (with my older brother validating it, of course) that poor Herman was adopted because he didn't have to wear glasses and had light brown hair instead of dark brown. And the poor kid believed it, until he went to my mom who told us that, no, she was there, he definitely was NOT adopted. lol. (my mom had all of us via natural childbirth).
My biggest bugaboo was also part of the charm of the book...she recalled her childhood as we all do: in vignettes. I think I wanted more chronological order to her stories, whereas she kind of jumped around (which wasn't so bad until she started reintroducing secondary characters, like that neighbor boy who kidnapped her cat, and that got me a bit confused). However, isn't that how we all remember when telling people of our past? We have a story that leads to another and then another, and then when topics change, we go back in our past to find experiences that relate to the new topic.
I think it's interesting how she touched upon her mother's depression and her father, also like we remember our childhood memories. My own mother suffered from severe and debilitating postpartum depression (back in the day when it wasn't labeled as such) during the same generation and I know that the things that were just normal for me and my siblings were kinda weird for other people and definitely not acceptable for an Air Force Officer's wife. Of course, I know this now. Back in the day, that's just how it was.
I really enjoyed Zippy. As I'm raising my own kids, I wonder what they'll remember of their childhood. Hopefully they'll look back on it with such a kind and compassionate eye. Thanks for suggesting it!!!
I've tried not to read any posts/remarks, so sorry if this sounds repetitive. :)
First, I have to say that I'd read "Zippy" right before bed, so I'd often fall asleep with that memoir-like narrative voice in my head, which was pretty surreal, let me tell you. It also made me haul out my own journal and write a few entries (I think I last wrote in it a year ago!!! egads!), so if for nothing else, I really appreciate reading "Zippy" for that reason alone!
Overall, I really enjoyed the book. I was INCREDIBLY moved by the story in the second chapter, I think, where she found a letter her mother had written in her baby book, concerning her illness when Zippy was 5 months old and the friends drove down from Gary, IN, so that her mother could sleep, and that they took her to the doctor and there were only 26 antibiotics (!!!!! Thinking about this now, after this past week when all three of my kids came down with strep throat and I just feel so blessed!) and the resident randomly picked the right one and Zippy survived the night after her mother turned the whole thing over to the Lord. And then I busted out laughing when she noted that after Zippy started talking, her mother wrote that all she had to say was "Please God, give that child some hair," or something like that. CRACKED me up.
I also laughed about her siblings telling her that she was adopted, because (true confession time) I remember telling my younger brother (with my older brother validating it, of course) that poor Herman was adopted because he didn't have to wear glasses and had light brown hair instead of dark brown. And the poor kid believed it, until he went to my mom who told us that, no, she was there, he definitely was NOT adopted. lol. (my mom had all of us via natural childbirth).
My biggest bugaboo was also part of the charm of the book...she recalled her childhood as we all do: in vignettes. I think I wanted more chronological order to her stories, whereas she kind of jumped around (which wasn't so bad until she started reintroducing secondary characters, like that neighbor boy who kidnapped her cat, and that got me a bit confused). However, isn't that how we all remember when telling people of our past? We have a story that leads to another and then another, and then when topics change, we go back in our past to find experiences that relate to the new topic.
I think it's interesting how she touched upon her mother's depression and her father, also like we remember our childhood memories. My own mother suffered from severe and debilitating postpartum depression (back in the day when it wasn't labeled as such) during the same generation and I know that the things that were just normal for me and my siblings were kinda weird for other people and definitely not acceptable for an Air Force Officer's wife. Of course, I know this now. Back in the day, that's just how it was.
I really enjoyed Zippy. As I'm raising my own kids, I wonder what they'll remember of their childhood. Hopefully they'll look back on it with such a kind and compassionate eye. Thanks for suggesting it!!!
Sunday, July 8
A Spitfire named Zippy...
Sorry for the late posting, folks. I really wanted to get creative and write a post by just quoting Haven words straight from the book. There were so many quotes throughout the book that cracked. Me. Up. Ends up, I'm not savvy enough to pull that kind of cool post together.
Let me share a few quotes that made me laugh out loud anyway. I can't count how many times Ian just gave me looks like I was crazy each time I'd have an outburst. And to my dismay, he didn't even want to know what the fuss was about... I did share the whole camping story though. How Zippy's dad would pack, repack and take the camper for a spin and check the lights again, etc. HILARIOUS!
The Quotes:
"If I could have gotten my nose close enough, I would have inhaled leaded gasoline until I was retarded."
"...but she had not truly known Chicken Love..."
"On the end-of-the-year report card all she was wrote was 'Is disruptive in class. Colors outside the lines. Talks out of turn.' When I showed it to my parents, they read it out loud to me, and my mom said, 'Good for you, sweetheart.' And my dad gave me a little pat on the back."
"Some people liked to go camping even if their daily lives already resembled camping."
"They're going to a convention." -- "Oh, a convention. Would that be for the Society of Drunken Philanderers?" -- "The SODP, we call it." -- "I see."
"Tiger had just tipped over sideways after chasing her own butt for ten minutes."
"It seemed that controlling her bladder was her one, overwhelming priority, because sometimes a little bit of pee would start to come out and she would look sad and shut it off and stand and stand and stand, and then a few minutes later a little bit more pee would come out..." -- "...which made me worried, because as I understood it, dogs did all their breathing through their tongues." -- "Jiggers, honey, why don't you just let all your pee out and then go lay down in the shade?" -- "I'd get under the porch if I were Jiggers. It's hotter than billy-be-doggone bangtree outside."
"...slicker than snot on a doorknob..."
"I had to tip over a little for laughing at the retarded gypsies, then straightened back up as I realized I was laughing at my own family."
"Plus you were born with a tail." -- "We had it removed so your pants would fit. Also we didn't want you to suffer in school."
"...nasty old bat."
"Well, she for sure knows you are not a Christian because you don't even go and pretend."
"...I'm going to turn you upside down and spit in your butt, are we clear?"
"...even though diamonds are girls, threes are boys." -- "Eights were completely girls, but the black eights were girls who were maybe a little too good at sports." -- "For good measure I put all the boys back in the box with the Joker, where they belonged."
"Mabel Simpkins told me today that the Jesus who died at Easter was the same one who was born at Christmas. Is that true?" -- "I just laughed at Mabel and told her she sure wasn't making a fool of me. I know Easter comes before Christmas."
"It was so pretty, I wanted to break it."
"...let me suggest some nice, fuzzy tights, the kind that don't go all the way to your crotch, but stop just in the middle of your thigh."
I also enjoyed the stories of Julie and how Zippy could read her mind and spoke for Julie... Even when she had to poop, Zippy asked the teacher if she could go.
I absolutely loved the Father's Day story where Zippy gets her dad a new dog from the hippies. It was so touching "it would have made a pirate weep."
Let me share a few quotes that made me laugh out loud anyway. I can't count how many times Ian just gave me looks like I was crazy each time I'd have an outburst. And to my dismay, he didn't even want to know what the fuss was about... I did share the whole camping story though. How Zippy's dad would pack, repack and take the camper for a spin and check the lights again, etc. HILARIOUS!
The Quotes:
"If I could have gotten my nose close enough, I would have inhaled leaded gasoline until I was retarded."
"...but she had not truly known Chicken Love..."
"On the end-of-the-year report card all she was wrote was 'Is disruptive in class. Colors outside the lines. Talks out of turn.' When I showed it to my parents, they read it out loud to me, and my mom said, 'Good for you, sweetheart.' And my dad gave me a little pat on the back."
"Some people liked to go camping even if their daily lives already resembled camping."
"They're going to a convention." -- "Oh, a convention. Would that be for the Society of Drunken Philanderers?" -- "The SODP, we call it." -- "I see."
"Tiger had just tipped over sideways after chasing her own butt for ten minutes."
"It seemed that controlling her bladder was her one, overwhelming priority, because sometimes a little bit of pee would start to come out and she would look sad and shut it off and stand and stand and stand, and then a few minutes later a little bit more pee would come out..." -- "...which made me worried, because as I understood it, dogs did all their breathing through their tongues." -- "Jiggers, honey, why don't you just let all your pee out and then go lay down in the shade?" -- "I'd get under the porch if I were Jiggers. It's hotter than billy-be-doggone bangtree outside."
"...slicker than snot on a doorknob..."
"I had to tip over a little for laughing at the retarded gypsies, then straightened back up as I realized I was laughing at my own family."
"Plus you were born with a tail." -- "We had it removed so your pants would fit. Also we didn't want you to suffer in school."
"...nasty old bat."
"Well, she for sure knows you are not a Christian because you don't even go and pretend."
"...I'm going to turn you upside down and spit in your butt, are we clear?"
"...even though diamonds are girls, threes are boys." -- "Eights were completely girls, but the black eights were girls who were maybe a little too good at sports." -- "For good measure I put all the boys back in the box with the Joker, where they belonged."
"Mabel Simpkins told me today that the Jesus who died at Easter was the same one who was born at Christmas. Is that true?" -- "I just laughed at Mabel and told her she sure wasn't making a fool of me. I know Easter comes before Christmas."
"It was so pretty, I wanted to break it."
"...let me suggest some nice, fuzzy tights, the kind that don't go all the way to your crotch, but stop just in the middle of your thigh."
I also enjoyed the stories of Julie and how Zippy could read her mind and spoke for Julie... Even when she had to poop, Zippy asked the teacher if she could go.
I absolutely loved the Father's Day story where Zippy gets her dad a new dog from the hippies. It was so touching "it would have made a pirate weep."
Zippy
Ladies,
Sorry I am late. I finished the book on time (sort of), but spent the last week in Utah with lots of family, including Katie. I really had a great time, but no spare minutes to post my review. Anyway, here it is:
Having been a teen-ager in a small town (American Fork, UT) during the 60's, I enjoyed this book on one level as a great trip back in time. (I LOVED the photos.) Actually, the setting and many of the events reminded me of my own childhood in the 50's. (Kimmel said Mooreland was a bit behind the times.) I kept writing down my experiences in the margins of the book as Zippy's experiences triggered my memories. My "pixie" haircut. My pair of red patent leather shoes with stacked heels. (I saved my money for weeks to buy them.) The arrival of my very first order of 45 rpm records. (My mother created a treasure hunt through the entire house to heighten my excitement!) I remembered the German shepherd in our neighborhood who killed our neighbor's little dog while I screamed hysterically on the front porch. I remembered when the "Fry Daddy" made its debut. I remembered smells that transport me instantly to some place or event in my past, like the smell of the service station on the corner or the clean chalkboards and floors in my elementary school on the first day. I remembered the Mickie Mouse Club and the blonde Mouseketeer named Karen. I remembered the red and black striped "Suzie longlegs" that my dad brought back from a business trip. I also remembered the "gross" shoes he made me buy when my mom had him take me shopping. I remembered how scary Maleficent was and that Marcus Welby, MD was a TV favorite. I remembered dresses that my Grandma wore, medical breakthroughs like polio vaccines, Avon lipstick, polyester pants, drive-in movies with the big silver sound box that hung over the window, Saturday matinees at the Coral Theater (25 cents), my junior high (the "old" high school) with the detached lunchroom and the candy store adjacent to the school, my mother pin-fitting a jumper to me, and the list goes on. (You can tell this book really took me back!)
But there are other things that made this book a good read besides nostalgia. First, Kimmel's writing style was so genuine and entertaining that I often laughed out loud! She did a great job of capturing a child's outlook and enthusiasm.
She also deals with some very profound issues. (Any of the 16 questions at the back of the book would be fun to discuss with you all.) Zippy's own religious awakenings (Easter--page 242) and her parents' differing approaches to things spiritual (from her dad's church in the trees to her mom's consistent attendance at church) really raised some important questions. I thought it was interesting that the book ended at Christmas with the comment, "Thank you for not losing faith."
The family dynamics dealt with important issues as well. Zippy matter-of-factly lets the reader in on Dad's gambling/smoking/compulsive behavior and Mom's depression/escape from life/financial problems. I found that the way Zippy's older brother and sister treated her really bothered me. For years, I have wrestled with when teasing becomes plain meanness and this seemed like a lot of meanness to me. (And she STILL looks up to them.)
I appreciated the things that made me think. I didn't appreciate the sick/dark side that Kimmel portrays using the neighbor family that abused animals. I wished it hadn't been part of the book. (Do all books today have to have something sensational in them?) When the rabbit was actually eating Zippy's finger, I was absolutely nauseous.
The carnivorous rabbit notwithstanding, I thoroughly enjoyed this book! It was fun and thought provoking and I'm glad I had the opportunity to read it.
--Karen Smith
Sorry I am late. I finished the book on time (sort of), but spent the last week in Utah with lots of family, including Katie. I really had a great time, but no spare minutes to post my review. Anyway, here it is:
Having been a teen-ager in a small town (American Fork, UT) during the 60's, I enjoyed this book on one level as a great trip back in time. (I LOVED the photos.) Actually, the setting and many of the events reminded me of my own childhood in the 50's. (Kimmel said Mooreland was a bit behind the times.) I kept writing down my experiences in the margins of the book as Zippy's experiences triggered my memories. My "pixie" haircut. My pair of red patent leather shoes with stacked heels. (I saved my money for weeks to buy them.) The arrival of my very first order of 45 rpm records. (My mother created a treasure hunt through the entire house to heighten my excitement!) I remembered the German shepherd in our neighborhood who killed our neighbor's little dog while I screamed hysterically on the front porch. I remembered when the "Fry Daddy" made its debut. I remembered smells that transport me instantly to some place or event in my past, like the smell of the service station on the corner or the clean chalkboards and floors in my elementary school on the first day. I remembered the Mickie Mouse Club and the blonde Mouseketeer named Karen. I remembered the red and black striped "Suzie longlegs" that my dad brought back from a business trip. I also remembered the "gross" shoes he made me buy when my mom had him take me shopping. I remembered how scary Maleficent was and that Marcus Welby, MD was a TV favorite. I remembered dresses that my Grandma wore, medical breakthroughs like polio vaccines, Avon lipstick, polyester pants, drive-in movies with the big silver sound box that hung over the window, Saturday matinees at the Coral Theater (25 cents), my junior high (the "old" high school) with the detached lunchroom and the candy store adjacent to the school, my mother pin-fitting a jumper to me, and the list goes on. (You can tell this book really took me back!)
But there are other things that made this book a good read besides nostalgia. First, Kimmel's writing style was so genuine and entertaining that I often laughed out loud! She did a great job of capturing a child's outlook and enthusiasm.
She also deals with some very profound issues. (Any of the 16 questions at the back of the book would be fun to discuss with you all.) Zippy's own religious awakenings (Easter--page 242) and her parents' differing approaches to things spiritual (from her dad's church in the trees to her mom's consistent attendance at church) really raised some important questions. I thought it was interesting that the book ended at Christmas with the comment, "Thank you for not losing faith."
The family dynamics dealt with important issues as well. Zippy matter-of-factly lets the reader in on Dad's gambling/smoking/compulsive behavior and Mom's depression/escape from life/financial problems. I found that the way Zippy's older brother and sister treated her really bothered me. For years, I have wrestled with when teasing becomes plain meanness and this seemed like a lot of meanness to me. (And she STILL looks up to them.)
I appreciated the things that made me think. I didn't appreciate the sick/dark side that Kimmel portrays using the neighbor family that abused animals. I wished it hadn't been part of the book. (Do all books today have to have something sensational in them?) When the rabbit was actually eating Zippy's finger, I was absolutely nauseous.
The carnivorous rabbit notwithstanding, I thoroughly enjoyed this book! It was fun and thought provoking and I'm glad I had the opportunity to read it.
--Karen Smith
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
