From the Mouth of the Whale - #33

Image sourced from here

This book is beautifully written. It's lyrical. It picks you up and carries you along. You are swept through streams of consciousness and through herbal medicinal books, and then through third person narrative. You switch from one to the other seamlessly. It's a masterpiece in that regard.

But I am left with one overwhelming question.

What the fuck was that all about?

I mean I get it. It's the story of Jonás the Learned and his exile. It's about the amazing things he does or witnesses before he is accused of sorcery  It is about his weird magic realism visions. It's about his wonderfully patient wife. It's about him going to Denmark. But... what's the point?

I dislike getting to the end of the book and being thoroughly confused. It's the awkward break up conversation. "It's not you, it's me. I just don't think I can see this going any where." The book is as silent as my exes on the receiving end of the speech. Which could be a credit to my exes. But you just burble to fill in the space. In the end you just convince the other person they are better off without you or your understanding, because you have just revealed yourself as being slightly insane and they feel like they have dodged a bullet. "Why doesn't this girl just shut up?!?"

But I don't like that it my reading. The book that is cute and charming enough to get you to snog it while you're a little bit drunk, and then wake up thinking "What the hell did I just do? Please tell me it's not lying next to me." The book that tells your these epic sagas and then gets to the punchline and tells you "Oh I would tell you the point but it's too existential for you." (which is an "excuse" I was given by a staff member turning up 5 hours late for a shift (shifts were 4 hours long)).

See. This makes me grumpy. It conjures up images of break ups, drunken snogs with pretty, vapid boys and horrible prats who think they are all higher plain but are just fuckwits. It takes you on a pretty journey and I don't get the conclusion. If there is one. And I just don't know why I was taken on the journey.

I really do wonder if it is a cultural thing. Do I not get it coz I'm not Icelandic or even Scandinavian? I'd hope not but I may be right. I will read another of his books. I hope it is just this book, and it is the longest of them all. But I am prepared to be completely confused again. I'm not saying don't read it, just in case it is really me.

What's with the Rainbow?

So to get all political on your arse (like that's never happened before... piffle). I believe that if you love somebody, it doesn't matter what race, creed, gender, colour or sex you are. You should be able to commit to each other in a loving relationship in front of your friends and family if you wish. Not everyone likes the idea of marriage, that's cool, I'm in a relationship with one of them. I'm also not saying a religious organisation should have to perform over unions they do not agree with.

What I think is that a relationship between two people who love each other should be able to have that recognised if they wish.

At the moment I live in a country that seems to be governed by conservatives who are more scared of what the evangelicals in their electorates think than the majority of Australians. I live in a country where an atheist PM (of the debatable "left" party) in a defacto relationship is terrified of the conservative vote. It does my head in.

This is why I have a big rainbow here. It's to say while I personally am not same sex attracted, my family members and friends who are and who want to get married, should be able to. And I will protest, and demonstrate, until they are able to. This is a wonderful thing. Two people willing to stand in front of everyone they know and commit themselves to each other is great. And this rainbow is declaring my support for this cause, and at the end of the month there will be a snapshot of all the websites who display this rainbow and be sent to the Australian Government. Follow the rainbow to see other sites who support this, add the code yourself, or dismiss it (it shouldn't show up again for you, yay for no spam). I don't mind, but this is what it is about.

And those of you who have quibbles, or just want a good rational debate, you should listen to this conservative pollie from New Zealand the other day when they debated, and passed, their own marriage equality bill.

Ender's Game

Image sourced from here

Alright. I read it. Our relationship can survive to be fought over normal relationship matters now, not the fact I haven't read his favourite book.

There was a threat made earlier this year that after all these years of not reading Lexx's favourite book, the crunch time was coming that he may leave me if I did not. I decided it was prudent to read the book, and not see how much of this threat was jest and how much truth was behind it.

I put it off honestly as I don't do spaceships. I just have an aversion to them. I don't know why, but it may have something to do with the fact my darling brother watched Star Wars and Return of the Jedi everyday for over 6 years. He would have watched The Empire Strikes Back too but we "lost" it at some point (I may need to thank my parents for this fact). So I procrastinated and read many other interesting things. I also put it off when I found out Orson Scott Card is a complete nutter and a rabid homophobe. But I finally picked it up.

It was a good read. I don't think it was fantastic, but I wonder what I would have thought as a young adult. But I did enjoy it a lot more than I was expecting.

First of all though, I had problems with believing Ender was the age he was. I had a very hard time suspending that belief. Once he ages, it was easier, but it was still slightly unbelievable. I mentioned this and got a long lecture about how they were genetically engineered kids and such. But still. I like some believability in my genetically engineered geniuses.

The bit I loved about the book the most I can't talk about. It's annoying but it all happened in the spoiler part of the book. To summarise as best I can though, the twist is great. I gasped audibly when it came. And the last 10 pages I left last night, as it was late and I was tired, and I wish I hadn't at all. I am so glad it ended where and how it did.

I believe I will enjoy Speaker for the Dead more. It's apparently more philosophical and political than Ender's battles and strategy. I read today that Speaker was actually the story he wanted to write, but he needed the back story and it got complicated.

I'm glad it did as I liked Ender. Really liked, he's a great protagonist. You can understand him, you understand his decisions, and above all you emphasise with him immensely. I liked Bean (he was good for a giggle) and some of the others, but no one as much as Ender. I recommend it highly. But just don't buy it new. Borrow it, secondhand bookshop it, whatever. And if you have to read one book to possibly save your relationship, there are millions of worse things to read ;)

Day Watch

Image sourced from here

In October I read Night Watch, for a Kazakhstan/Russian read. I picked up the sequel, Day Watch, as I enjoyed it so much. This book follows on, but instead of focusing on the Night Watch, it, as the name suggests focuses on the Day Watch. However I found this slightly not the case, as the stories frequently flick from the Day Watch agent's perspective to that of previously met Night Watch agents. Where as you felt in Night Watch that he liked his characters, does not seem to feel that way about the Day Watch and seems to keep running back to the previous characters he prefers more.

I noted the technology being dated a lot more in this book. I know they were walking around Moscow with minidisc players in the last book, but I viewed it as a quirk. However the running to their desktops to open Netscape to start searching made me laugh. Mental note to self, if ever I write a book, don't mention operating systems or search engines. In a few years they seem ridiculously out of date.

But it was still fun, just not as much. But you get taken further than Moscow in this volume, passing into the Crimea, Ukraine and Prague. I still will read the other two though. I still love the style of writing, the Russian tone. Cannot get enough of it.

Toppler - Northern Lights

Image sourced from here

I've had this book on my radar for a while. An old friend of mine recommended it to Lexx and I as an "atheist Narnia". Now, I loved Narnia. Was completely and totally in love with it. My old copies of the books are falling apart, especially Prince Caspian which was my Mum's before mine. And I remember reading The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe as one of my first "grown up" books at aged 6. So this recommendation was a winner for me.

I picked up the book expecting to be able to read it in 24 hours for the last Toppler YLTO held a couple of weekends ago. I has assumed it was a kids book. I do think now it still is a kids book, but one which is not dumbed down for kids. If there was a word that perfectly fitted what Philip Pullman wanted to say, he used it. Who cares if kids don't know the word sardonic. They either learn from the book, or if they are really interested they'll pull down a dictionary or more likely Google (not sure how many houses besides ours has a giant dictionary anymore), or god forbid, ask their parental units. It was not Harry Potter writing, this was seriouz biznezz.

Which was great, but wasn't achievable on my Sunday. But the story was enjoyable, fun and full of adventures. It was also dark, scary, descriptive and had a bit of death in it. I was a bit shocked every time these kind of things happened. Lexx just looked at me and said "I told you it was different." It's true, he did. But you know, since when did I pay attention?

The main thing to note is that I still consider it a kids book. There is always hope in the book. And to me, that is what makes kids books so much easier to handle that adult books. There is always hope that good will prevail. It's not as in your face in this book as most others, but you still feel it. And that's important for kids. Bad stuff happens, but you should always hope.

Otherwise, witches, ghosties, talking bears, gypsies, animal familiars, magic, parallel universes. What's not to love?! The one thing I can't work out is my real surname is rather similar to the main baddie's name. Never mentioned before, by anyone. It's not a common sound either, so I was surprised. And a little chuffed that someone in a book nearly had the same name as me. Trust me, this is a big deal.

I don't know why there is a big hoo ha about how it's all anti-God. It's not. There baddies are an institution that has evolved from the church. It's anti that establishment, for free thinking, and so on. But the first book wasn't a challenge to Christianity (not sure where the others go). Mind you, the people that claim these things probably think that if a caterpillar looks at them funny it's challenging Christianity, so I won't think about it too hard

So read it. Read the sequels, as I am planning to. Read it to your kids, or let them discover it for themselves. Although if you do choose it as a bedtime story, choose your ending points well. And always remind the kidlets there is hope.

Challenge - Jane Eyre

Image sourced from here

I got given Jane Eyre many years ago. Much to my mother’s distaste. In fact I mentioned to her the other day I was reading it and she groaned. And flopped over. And continued groaning and stooping lower and lower until her arms were dragging on the floor while she trudged around the kitchen at an incredibly slow and thumping rate.

If you think I’m prone to overreaction and drama, you should meet my Mum.

It then emerged that she couldn’t quite remember reading it as she ran around the house warbling “Cathy!!!” and I pointed out that was the wrong sister and book, not that I have read Wuthering Heights either. She did finally remember reading it when I was speculating on the end, and she got an evil grin on her face, opened her mouth, clamped both hands over it quickly, and ran away.

See my previous comment. Throw in my Dad’s Yorkshire tendencies to tell long, rambley stories over a pint or 7, and I didn’t stand a chance.

So on my second attempt to read it, I finished. I had to read it. We share a name. In fact when I came across the quote, which I actually really like;

“Do you think, because I am poor, obscure, plain, and little, I am soulless and heartless? You think wrong!” –p282

I am wondering if my good friend in high school calling me (and writing all over my stuff) “Jane, plain and small” was actually her being literary. Strong possibility.

So what did I actually think? I loved the first half of the book. Besides the love of semi-colons (says the girl with the love of commas and parentheses), I really enjoyed the writing. And she at least knew how to use those semi-colons. I loved the feeling of being back in Yorkshire. I loved the moors. I liked Jane. I even liked Mr Rochester. As I said to Mum, “He’s actually quite funny and intelligent. Until he doesn’t stop talking. He just goes on and on and becomes ridiculous, and you just wish you could shake him and say ‘Oh just stop talking!! I liked you so much better when you weren’t talking!!’”. She pointed out in mirth that may be the pot calling the kettle black. Bah.

But then it goes a bit pear-shaped. The big twist in events happens. She meets St John Rivers, who needs to get the .. hell... over himself frankly. The book gets ridiculously preachy. I got stuck in sermons that I didn’t realise I being lead into, and that made me grumpy at the characters for breaching my trust. Oh and then the end! Dear god!

So I’m glad I read it. I liked the first 300pp or so. It was going to be a 4 starrer I thought. It would pull me out of this 3 star slump I’ve been in. But alas, it was not to be.

Challenge - The Catcher in the Rye

Image sourced from here

I try and make it a habit not to discuss overly discussed books. Although I don't think it would be fair of me to read this book without allowing myself the opportunity to respond to it.

I have heard about this book for years. It was one of the books I had to have read. It was one of the ones I *should* have read. I get so annoyed I had my 5 year hiatus of reading in my teenage years. I read one or two things, and read things for English at school. But after years of being ridiculed at primary school for reading and knowing things, I was determined not to in high school in order to fit in. It kind of worked. Until I read a book I loved and then devoured it with a rabid hunger that was screaming to be fed. I should have taken the hint I was a junky, but I was 14. I knew better.

The problem with this now, is that I am over 5 years behind on my reading (going on my stats from the last two years, averaging 20 books a year, that's 100 books I could have read). And when you are 5 years behind, there is a lot of reading you postpone again and again. Catcher was one of these.

I loved and hated Holden. There were things he said that I though were brilliant and I could not believe that a 17 year old could have said. There were moments where I wanted to slap him upside the face and give him a good shake. I thought long and hard since I finished it what 17 year old Rusalka would have though of him, and I don't think she would think much differently. She was a bit of a prude, although had a thing for the bad boys. God knows really. But the fundamental frustration and intrigue I think would have been similar.

I loved the bit though where he is talking to at the moment unnamed source (spoilers!) about the concept where the name of novel came from. That was beautiful. That was the part 17 year old me would have fallen in love. That's the main part of the book that felt real. However the rest of the book I wanted to kill him. He was so frustrating. And I know 17 year old Rus would have felt the same. We, her and I, have always had a small amount of patience for boys with self important bullshit.

In the end I can see why this book was mind blowing when it was written. I can see why 13 year olds may flock to it. But in a present day world. I don't quiet get it. Maybe it is the late 20s me that doesn't get it too. But I feel that great books can speak to you no matter your age, even if you can see that you would have loved it more at XX age. I'm glad I read it, but a little overhyped. I'm expecting to be burnt at the stake so go for it ;)