Legend of the Seeker: A Bunch of Hot People Having Exciting Adventures That Involve Magic

I published my readalong post before midnight SO I GET TO POST AGAIN TODAY. Such are the rules. Also I've sucked at posting lately and tomorrow's Moonstone Day (did you all see my addendum about researching the Siege of Seringapatam? very good). Sooo today's gonna be about Legend of the Seeker. Said post is inspired by Meg's most recent post, and if you're not following Meg, WHAT ARE YOU DOING GET ON THAT. So. Legend of the Seeker is based on a terrible series of books by Terry Goodkind. I mean, I picked up the series thinking "All right, this probably isn't going to be very good," and it was WORSE THAN MY LOW EXPECTATIONS.

However. A tv series was made and aired a few years ago on ABC and I watched the first few episodes and went ZOMG THIS IS THE BEST BUT ALSO THE WORST BUT ALSO THE BEST.

Basically, Legend of the Seeker is the prettiest. The writing's cliché, the acting's so-so, and its special effects are those of fair to middling sci-fi/fantasy, BUT. The Pretty cannot be ignored.

And the clichés are kind of comforting. Like in the pilot, one of the characters not only says "Who are you to decide a man's destiny?", but also "Prophecy be damned!" So you can predict most of what people are going to say (ex: when the hero tries to interfere and save the girl in the pilot, the villain says something along the lines of "Get out of my way, boy!"), so you don't have to focus on things like "the script", but can just sort of stare.

And the central character is this young guy who didn't know he was totally special and awesome, but one day gets told he IS, and he has to save the world, and it's basically Harry Potter, Darkness Is Rising and Everything Else Ever.

But I really, really don't care. Because I just look at the two leads, giggle kind of stupidly and say "YOU'RE SO PRETTY." (by the way, the pilot really does kind of suck, but the show swiftly improves, so POWER THROUGH and get to prettiness and Hitherto Unknown Levels of Unresolved Sexual Tension)

So the pilot opens, and you see galloping horses. Not surprising for a medieval-type show. Then there are pretty dresses. *ears perk up* Then there's long hair, bows and arrows and the heroine it turns out is like 5'10. Oh hi BEST SHOW EVER.

Then THIS happens:

"Heyyyyy Craig Horner"

That is the SECOND SCENE. I applaud the people at ABC for not trying to make "art" or "say something", but instead giving us a horse chase involving kickass women, followed by a hot guy chopping wood. I am so on board with this show that I have my name carved over a bunk below decks.

So Richard (Hot Guy) is super-special, and his protector is Hot Girl (Kahlan -- "Kay-len") who's the lady in white above, and because they're both MEGA-HOT but they can't be together because of MAGIC, there's awesome tension ALL THE TIME, and also there's this old wizard guy who travels with him and continually prevents them from having sexytimes even though they both REALLY want to because they're both soooo attractive.

"How YOU doin'?"

It's on Netflix Instant. It's only two seasons. It was filmed in New Zealand, so in addition to its pretty, pretty people it has gorgeous background shots. Oh yeah, and this kind of thing happens all the time, because ABC just doesn't even try to mask what this show's about:

Ah, the first of many shots of Kahlan Cleavage

Oh yeah, also DARKEN RAHL. Also the Mord Sith. I have not even SCRATCHED. THE SURFACE. So much greatness. Watch this. Then we'll all chat about how amazing Kahlan's hair is. Yes. Excellent.

Telegraph Avenue: The Finishening

So ends the month-long readalong of Michael Chabon's Telegraph Avenue. And look, the basic question should just be wrapped up here — should you read this or not? And the answer is yeah. Yeah, you should read it.

I believe we've discussed the shiny, shiny red cover, which'll just look nice on a bookcase. Really brightens up the place.

Basically this book takes subjects I don't really care about — jazz, blaxploitation films, midwifery — and made me care about them. Not forever and for always, but while I read. Which is damned impressive. This was my first Chabon. I'd suspected I wouldn't like him too much, and while he does verge on the I'm a Sensitive White Guy side of things, he's an excellent, awesome author and I'm totally checking out more of his books.

Titus? Love. Gwen? I tolerate. Julie? Aw, Julie. Luther Stallings? That guy's great. Y'know, to read about. Probably not to actually know.

Damn, I want pie. I'm writing this in my room and I ate some sugar cream pie in here yesterday and the scent LINGERS, which is a hell of a lot better than some other scents that could linger, but still. I am sitting here with nary a pie shop in sight. Let's move on.

Very few things make me nostalgic (in that way you can be nostalgic for something you never lived through) for the '60s and '70s. I tend to think of them as times of orange and brown shag carpet, hippies contributing nothing to the world, and having a basic appreciation of Star Wars, but without the excellence yet of 1980's Empire Strikes Back.

But this makes me want to go to maybe 1977 and eat a giant Dream of Cream cake, go see a Luther Stallings film and say "Do what you gotta do. And stay fly" to my friends, possibly (probably) while drunk. Hopefully on some gross '70s drink.

There's a definite feel that encompasses the whole book and made me excited to go back to reading it. While all the characters at some point act in ways you might disagree with, they're still all compelling characters. I rarely found myself disappointed when the scene flipped to someone else, because that new character's arc was just as interesting.

It's even a story about men with FATHER ISSUES and I liked it. Do you know how much I hate father issues? I HATE THEM SO MUCH. Why? Because every sensitive guy who decides to write a screenplay or novel seems, at some point, to want to talk about how he and his dad don't get each other. WOW do I not care. So if you're able to take your father issue storyline and somehow make it not suck, I am impressed. Michael Chabon, I tip my non-existent hat to you (my head's kinda big and it's hard to find hats that fit).


You all should read Telegraph Avenue if you like inter-generational stories that involve sassy short skirts and parrots and kung fu.

You can totes pre-order it (OUT SEPTEMBER 12TH, PEOPLE) heeeeeeere at Odyssey Books, which would be mega-awesome since you'd be helping Emily's store, which I've NEVER visited, because it's in Massachusetts, but I'll bet it's awesome because 1) Emily and 2) MASSACHUSETTS. Land of John Adams and that part of the country where there used to be farmers who looked like this:

Which is exciting. Or you could buy from IndieBound, or wherevs except that massive retailer that is like a billion times worse than Fox Books in You've Got Mail, because NO TOM HANKS and you're driving Meg Ryan's super-cute bookstore out of business like 50 times over. FIFTY MEG RYANS. Omg how can you even stand it. Buy from the Massachusetts Farmer Man. How else are his children going to survive the winter.

The Moonstone: Readalong Planning

Ok, I'm sure we're all very excited about the Moonstone readalong, because WILKIE COLLINS. Last time we had basically no idea who he was, and now we are filled with a deep and abiding love for him and his weird-looking head.

So this'll be good times. I bought my copy the other day, and saw to my utter delight that it is AGAIN broken up into different narratives, so we shall have our various preferred characters again and debate over whether someone is hilarious or DOES NOT STRIKE US THAT WAY (ok, this happened, but then I reversed my opinion).

I left said copy at home, so my chapter divisions might be weird since they're based on the internet, but people need to be reminded this is happening, and happening WEDNESDAY, although Wednesday's just the first sort of "Let's introduce ourselves, etc etc" which people don't HAVE to do, but it's nice if you do it, 'cause then people're like "Oh, you! You're that person I know more about now! Let's talk about The Moonstone together."

I know last time not everyone's copy had it divided into periods and epochs and whatever, but MOST copies seem to do it. Thanks, Wilkie. That system really simplifies matters.

Schedule:

August 1st: Intro posts. "My name's Blahblah and since I don't know all of you, here's this and this about me, and I'm doing this readalong because I love blah." [insert joke about Wilkie's forehead, because we clearly haven't done enough of those]

August 8th: Prologue THROUGH First Period, Chapter XIV.

August 15th: Chapter XV through Second Period, First Narrative, Chapter VI

August 22nd: Chapter VII through Second Period, Third Narrative, Chapter VII

August 29th: Finish

OH HOW FUN THIS SHALL BE

edit: I'm gonna make an addendum to the first post and say LOOK UP THE SIEGE OF SERINGAPATAM, because it's mentioned on the very first page, and people in Victorian times knew what it was.

This once again morphed into something I did not expect

You know what I want? I want it to be like the 1300s, and a parallel universe, and I'm made to go on a quest in my leather boots, carrying my satchel with bread, cheese and a flask of wine, and maybe there're some gnomes and shit, and at some point I get lost in the forest, but then this deer that's totally into me but not in a gross way leads me out of the forest, and I hug it around its deer neck and carry on with my journey, and then YOU THINK I'M NOT GOING TO FINISH THE QUEST, but then I DO, and I journey back home and everyone's all "We shall have a celebration in the mead hall!" and then we all have an awesome time.


That's what I want.

My readalong post is indefinitely postponed for this week, as my crazy, hedonistic partying lifestyle got in the way of reading the book. So if I were going to post about Telegraph Avenue this week, it would just be bitching about the 12 page sentence that Chabon saw fit to throw in there, because I'm still in the middle of that. We know 12 page sentences can be done, Chabon. We know. THAT DOES NOT MAKE THEM GOOD.

I was ever-so-slightly arguing with the awesome Rainbow Rowell today, mainly about the okayness of downloading books. Basically (read: totally) meaning stealing them. This came about because I wanted to look at Mists of Avalon, but it was too late to go to the library, and I had a sneaking suspicion it was Arthurian revisionist New Agey b.s. and thusly did not want to buy it.

IS DOWNLOADING BOOKS EVER OK? Those insanely irritating don't-download-movies-because-it's-stealing unskippable ads that play before some DVDs (which is RIDICULOUS because they're playing for the people who BOUGHT the movie) kind of apply here, but I feel like they miss the point. We share more information now than ever before. And yeah, we've come to expect a lot of it to be free. But if I love something, I'll pay for it. If I want to support someone because I think their work is excellent, I'll donate to a Kickstarter.

The only advantage I see in publishing houses/distribution companies now is in their PR, but I kind of get that more from friends now. If I see ten ads for something and it looks pretty good, they won't have the same impact on me as one friend I trust saying "Oh, you should TOTALLY see/listen to/read that," or a really enthusiastic/hilarious post about it on Tumblr.

Should you normally go to the library and not download a book? Yeah. Totally. And if you just steal all your books/music/what-have-you, then you're a tool. But are there times we should not ignore the technology given to us and let it teach us things we suspected already? (how often have I liked feminist reinterpretations of things? that'd be never) Yeah. There're times for that.

Omg P to the S, people, Merlin the miniseries from 1998 is on Netflix Instant, and it still kicks ass after 14 years. Sam Neill and Isabella Rossellini! Helena Bonham Carter! Martin Short! Get on that.

Not Everything Is Terrible

In the wake of the events of last night, it can be easy to despair over the fact that things like this are still happening, and to feel a certain sense of hopelessness about humanity. So here is one random, beautiful thing created by man that has done nothing but uplift others for years now. If you can think of something else, please list it/link.

Desert Hearts, You Were Not What I Was Expecting

I NEVER get to write blog posts at home, as home is where I practice piano and singing and watch South Park and eat hummus. Work is where I wait for the phone to ring and stuff envelopes (I AM THE BACKBONE OF MY COMPANY). But here I have access to a whole other array of gifs. SO EXCITING. So although this shall be published while I am at work, it is written in the midst of a thunderstorm, as I wear an oversized t-shirt with multiple superheroes on it and pirate boxer shorts, both of which I fear would be deemed unsuitable work attire (a tragic loss for the company).

This week I am basically only super-focusing on Telegraph Avenue and Love Medicine by Louise Erdrich (summary thus far: Native Americans are people too), so I have little to say on the subject of books, BUT I just watched the film Desert Hearts (based on Desert of the Heart by Jane Rule), which I, for about a year, mistakenly assumed was about a transvestite man getting stuck in the desert. I'm sorry, but from far away, this woman in the hat looks kind of like a man:

Nope! Turns out it's a lady, AND it's a really famous movie AND it's about ladies in Nevada in the '50s-but-with-'80s-hair fallin' in lurve (that's the spelling, right?). Speaking of which — kind of — if you haven't heard the song 80's Ladies by K.T. Oslin, you my friend are in for a TREAT. I've listened to it like four times while writing this. So special.

So, movie plot:  This 35-year-old English prof. from Columbia (go on...) is in Nevada in the '50s to get a divorce because she is dissatisfied with her life and wants to figure out how to fix it. For it is stagnant. And she is Missing Something (guess what that is? hint: it doesn't rhyme with 'a pan').

What was that? Why of COURSE she meets a wild and free-spirited young lesbian who causes her to slowly come out of her repressed shell and embrace life.

It's actually not as douchey as it sounds. But it is a little bit, because the young, out lesbian who helps the scared, closeted, older lesbian kind of seems like a cliché now, so there was some eye-rolling on my part when I saw this was the direction it was taking.

Something that was kind of refreshing was that the younger girl is pretty damn "out" for the '50s, so there was no agonizingly annoying scene where the family tries to deal with the revelation of her gayness. Seen it before, it's been done too much, don't want it, thank you.


Ok, so Closeted Lady Professor slowly embraces this heady Nevada life, which apparently consists of going to bars, listening to country music, and wearing Hank Williams shirts. And slooooowly realizing she's into Young Out Free-Like-the-Wind Girl. But also denying it, because who needs that shit to deal with?

Closeted Lady Professor: "I think I might be into this 25-year-old girl."
The 1950s: "Oh, well, you know, it's your life and who are we to make it harder to live it, y'know?...ahahahaha Omg TOTALLY j/king. Totally. But seriously, no, we're gonna make you hate yourself."



I was kind of confused while watching, because it was rated R, and it didn't seem worth that. So I was all up in arms (while lying down, eating a Magnum Double Chocolate ice cream bar) about how the ratings people in the '80s sucked and gave a movie with ladies kissing an R rating, and that's ridiculous and — oh there're boobs. But no! Boobs are in PG-13 movies and — oh. Other stuff. Never mind.

So the sex scene is kind of way more graphic than I was expecting, and all I could think during it was how AWKWARD that would've been to film, because the camera's just right up in there, and if I were one of the actors I'd probably keep cracking terrible jokes or just randomly start giggling and ruin every take.

Then the ladies are both like


But they have Things to Work Out, and there's a dramatic scene involving a boozy stepmother and the younger girl being all "YOU'RE RUINING MY LIFE" and stomping around. Leading into the ending, which was actually great. Really, really great. As in well-done. Because OH HOW EASILY ONE CAN TREAD INTO SACCHARINE AND HORRIBLE. But IMO they did not do this.

Anyway. Watch this movie. It is Pop Culturally Important, and there're lots of pretty shots of Nevada mountains. I was looking for a gif from it, but all the ones available seem to be the two ladies making out in various states of undress. Which is a really small percentage of the film, but I guess that scene where they were walking in a field somehow wasn't as compelling to gif. So this can play me out:

Telegraph Avenue: The Vinyl Section and So Forth (minus the so forth)

All right. Section 2 of Emily's Telegraph Avenue Readalong.

So here's the thing: I love Titus. Like, love. A whole lot. To the point where I'm kind of like "Why isn't everyone shouting on their posts about Titus?" BUT I get that this is the kind of book where the expanse of characters who are given page space is so great that people are going to pick different ones they love.

This section...I'm actually not that crazy about Gwen. And with these character likes and dislikes, you can then ask yourself "Well, why?" and LEARN THINGS about thyself, so good job there, Chabon. But yeah, I get that she's got a whole lot of shit going on in her life. And that there's this stigma I just don't get because I'm white, but CAN YOU STOP SHOOTING YOURSELF IN THE FOOT, GWEN? PLEASE. It is frustrating to watch. You're not proving anything to these people other than confirming stereotypes they probably have.

Archy's kind of more mysterious at this point. Which I like. That's the thing, right? If this long, drawn-out explication isn't your bag, you're probably not going to like the book. But if it IS, then you're gonna be way into it. And it's TOTALLY my bag. *searches brain for bag jokes, comes up empty*

We don't quite GET Archy yet. He's slowly being revealed, and since part of him's seen through others' eyes, and a lot of it's negative, it's difficult to figure out who he really is. Which is just kind of exciting, because it IS slowly being discovered, and I trust by the end of the book I'll have a much more definite opinion on him than I do right now. But now?...I just don't know.

I like that you briefly see inside Archy's head, but it's at the beginning when you have no information about him. Gwen believes he keeps forgetting he's going to be a father, but he went out of his way to babysit that tiny person at the very beginning. WHEELS WITHIN WHEELS. Or something.

I do totally agree with Nicole that Obama's presence in the novel was weird and kind of dumb. If Chabon wanted to explain why he has him in there, fine, but otherwise it felt like either pandering, or dramatic irony. In either case, eh.

I did enjoy this quote by Aviva enough to mark it:

"It's like some kind of not-good date you keep asking me on."

Zing! HUMOR.

This post could have gone better. But basically all my hilarity circuits are misfiring this morning, so I give you this present, WHICH IS RELATED TO THE BOOK because they mention Eldridge Cleaver pants, and of course I had to google them:

For the discerning gentleman

The Fire Chronicle: Quest for the ARC

Do y'all remember when I reviewed The Emerald Atlas and basically said it was covered in glitter, unicorns and Santa's laughter? Yes, well, so there's that, AND THEN I FOUND OUT THE SEQUEL WAS COMING OUT, and the ever-delightful Megs from The Terrible Desire helped me out on Twitter. Below is my Twitter Quest to obtain this ARC. Did I succeed? ONLY TIME WILL TELL.  (note: I totally succeeded)

Alice: Followers! I charge you to assail the fortress of @randomhousekids
until they deliver unto me the ARC of the Emerald Atlas sequel! Go forth!

Alice: *dons epaulets, used for fancy battle* I shall not rest until the
ARC hath been given unto me for reviewing purposes!
#emeraldatlassequel

Megs: *Lights torch* *Hoists pitchfork* *Knocks politely on fortress
door* @randomhousekids

Alice: @MegsGranger We should have battlefrogs. Or kangaroos. Although the
latter would be used more for fighting than riding. @randomhousekids

Megs: @operawombat Or AT-ATs! Polite ones that really tried not to crush
anything expensive. @randomhousekids

Random House Kids: Attention all those craving THE FIRE CHRONICLE
(ahem @MegsGranger @operawombat) Since @JohnRStephens just finished the
manuscript, no ARCs yet!

Alice: @randomhousekids ...we appreciate your information and shall be
slowly calling back our battlefrogs and AT-ATs. @MegsGranger @JohnRStephens


At a more recent point in time:

Me: @randomhousekids Dearest RandomHouse Kids, is there any step
forward in @johnrstephens's in-all-likelihood-delightful second book?

Me: @randomhousekids Most sincerely, That Girl Who Almost Stormed Your
Citadel Until You Said You Didn't Have the Thing Being Stormed For Yet

Random House Kids: @operawombat No ARCs yet! Also, we are recommending That Girl Who Almost Stormed Your Citadel as working title for any new Steig Larsson books.

So basically, the people at Random House Kids are my complete favorites and if I meet them I WILL HUG THEM SO HARD, because they have not blocked me on twitter yet despite so, SO much provocation.

Bookish Issues

These are all books I've started. Looking at what I have checked out from the library, it seems I left out a couple, but I haven't looked at those in a few weeks, so they don't count. 

I have a problem, and it's bookish ADD.

Note: These are all excellent books. Don't blame the books.

The Moonstone Readalong! (and a question about Emma)

Last night I, on the spur of the moment, decided to go to the Women's Classics book group at the fantastic bookstore Women and Children First in Andersonville (it's on the northside in Chicago). I was kinda down and was like "It'd be really great to be around people who aren't work-people," and they were discussing Emma! Which is my favorite Austen! And I just watched Clueless, so I was obviously all set (aside from forgetting the character Mrs Elton existed, so when she was brought up, I believe I made a "Hnyer?" face).

Anyway. The point being that someone brought up an excellent question about Mr Woodhouse (Emma's father). Namely, does his railing against marriage throughout the novel serve as a counterpoint to Emma's matchmaking/eventual marriage, or what is the structural point of it? I think this is worth pondering.

NOW. MOONSTONE READALONG IN AUGUST. Wilkie Collins! Apparently a moonstone! Dudes in turbans! Surely some intrigue!

If you were around for the Woman in White readalong, or saw it but didn't participate, you are aware that these readalongs are kickass and involve many GIFs and hilarious observations by fellow bloggers. I was a loner when it came to reading for QUITE some time, as I tend to assume people in book groups will offer idiotic opinions and I'll be left rolling my eyes and feeling superior, but INSTEAD my experience has been that they point out things I would have missed and make the book far more enjoyable. Except for Norwegian Wood, but then we all got to commiserate about how much it sucks (except for Laura, whom we all love anyway).

So sign up below. As always, ignore the 'please comment' thing. I don't care if you comment. That sentence is forced upon me by Mr Linky. The readalong's gonna start Wednesday, August 1st and go through to the 29th. Here's your classy graphic:

Never Trust a Librarian and Readalong Pt 2

Firstly, an aside.

Dear Library Man:

There was no call for you to be Mr. Rudepants with me when I asked if you had any Christopher Moore and where would it be and you said "The fiction section" and waved your hand dismissively towards that area. I know he writes fiction. One could perhaps assume that I wasn't just picking a random name and seeing if it was associated with a book. But maybe he was in Mysteries! Maybe he was in Sci-Fi/Fantasy! I HAD JUST COME FROM FICTION AND HE WAS NOT THERE.

You followed this up by finding me in the Fiction section, book in hand, saying "It seems he's written a mystery novel." This is when I must inform you that "Christopher G. Moore" is not the same as "Christopher Moore," and Christopher Moore never wrote this:

But then I had to check it out so I wouldn't make you feel bad. So now I have this book by Canadian detective novelist Christopher G. Moore, when all I really wanted to do was read Lamb. I AM NEVER ASKING A LIBRARIAN ANYTHING EVER AGAIN.

Cliquez ici pour Emily's
blog

Now. Onto Telegraph Avenue.

Ugh, ok, this book. It's really, really good. And that needs to be understood.

I'm gonna try not to offer out any serious spoilers. And when I do, I shall use my awesome Titanic or River Song spoilers banner. We're done with part 1 out of 5, and honestly, I was not expecting it to be very good. Or rather, I was not expecting to connect with Chabon's style. BUT I DO OH HOW I DO.

So it alternates (from what I can tell -- things are a bit vague, which normally I hate, but more on that in a sec) between the 1970s and today. Which is fun, because who doesn't like reading about bell-bottoms? There's a record shop on Telegraph Avenue, which is...I guess a place? Ah. Yes it is. And according to Wikipedia, "Telegraph attracts a diverse audience of visitors, including college students, tourists, artists, street punks, eccentrics, and the homeless." Ah-HA! So you're saying it could possibly be featured in a novel consisting of characters from all walks of life, bound together through the virtue of residing in the same small geographical location? HOW INTERESTING.

These two guys own a record shop, and they're all into...jazz and shit, which I know nothing about. And don't really care about. Any worthy music from the '60s and '70s totally blows by me. I will listen to The Shirelles, thank you. And this is actually kind of a Thing in the book. Meaning it talks about SO MANY THINGS I know nothing about, which ends up being both intriguing and disconcerting, because you're like "Wait...am I supposed to know what that is? Is that made up for the book or real? I HAVE LOST ALL SENSE OF DIRECTION." So that's confusing, but it also feels like this new world is uncovered into which one would never venture if not for this book. It talks about blaxploitation films of the '70s, and kung fu movies and midwifery and basically yeah, nothing in my realm of experience. Which is swell.

Along with the above, it references specifics about baseball cards, and something called a Terrible Towel and all sorts of Fairly Specific to Guy Culture items. This is like that time I talked to my cousin's boyfriend for a while about movies and thought we were totally on the same wavelength because I had brothers and I could talk to guys, and then after like ten minutes he said "I don't really watch sci-fi movies" and I realized my brothers are all nerds.

I love almost all the characters, which is how a book sells itself to me. And, I would assume, most people. "Do I care what happens to these people? No? Ehhhh! Done with this." I get confused about who each person is and how they're related, but THIS IS ON PURPOSE and it makes you think more and I LIKE it. Also when a certain character cheats on his wife (you know the one I mean), this was my reaction:

"WHYYYYYYY"

And I am pro-books that cause that reaction. I'm really very much looking forward to the rest of this. Good job being pretty awesome, Michael Chabon. Oh, and you can pre-order this fine book (out in Septembeeeer, read iiiiit) here from Emily's store (Emily is awesome, you guys) or indiebound or whatevs. You know how this works. DON'T BUY IT FROM AMAZON. THEY WOULD GLEEFULLY BURN DOWN INDEPENDENT BOOKSTORES AND DANCE ON THE ASHES.

And here's your special thing of the week, kids:

"Lisa, never, EVER stop in the middle of a hoedown."

Once Upon a Readathon is here and I...am backing out. I feel like doing a readalong and the mandatory posts that go with it, coupled with readathon posts, would make this blog a mass of uninterestingness for those not involved in either, and I CARE ABOUT YOU PEOPLE AND YOUR BOREDOM.

I saw Spider-Man this past weekend, and since I hadn't wanted to see it and was dragged by my younger brother, my final reaction was something along the lines of:



Not NEARLY as stupid as the shitstorm of misogynistic suck that was Spider-Man 3, but stupid in the sense of "Rahhhh and now I'm a giant lizard man and I WILL DESTROY YOU" and you're like "...wait, am I watching a lizard man? Didn't this cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make?"

And then you go home and wikipedia Spider-Man history and find out that yes, there was indeed a lizard man enemy, and he was named "Lizard," because back in 1964 they just didn't have to try very hard. And at least the screenwriter didn't go with "Mister Negative," however awesome that would've been to hear punned, or "the Burglar," which...really? Really?

Anyway. A lot's being made of Gwen Stacy being kind of the antithesis of Mary Jane (the movie version of MJ, anyway) because she's not just there to be saved. Which, yes, is very nice, but it's also pissing off a lot of comic fans (*cough*onTumblr*cough*) because in the comics, MJ is kind of a badass. But also, c'mon, Emma Stone is awesome, so it's not really a fair comparison.

Comic books are reading material, so just go with me on this tangent, people. So they first became big during the Cold War, right? Because "rawwwr Russians, if only we had some dudes who would be all invincible and shit," and yeah, they didn't seem to fight Russians very often, but NEITHER DID ROCKY EXCEPT THAT ONE TIME AND IT WAS AWESOME. But they were there to instill confidence into the American citizen and show us how much the individual can rock it.

I'm sure there's a bunch of other stuff with that, but, y'know. I don't read comics.

HOWEVER. My point being that for the past decade, we've had a major resurgence of interest in superheroes. It's like during the Great Depression, they had musicals, and now, our escapism is people with superhuman abilities (but NO tap skills, apparently). And the most popular hero seems to be Batman. Who is a dick. So what does this say about us as a people? I was going to say "as a country," but 1) not all of you are Americans, and 2) the superhero craze is not confined to our borders.

I believe some pondering is necessary.

The Price of Salt: A Book I Am Reviewing

All right. Gonna sit down and talk about The Price of Salt, which is an important enough book to get its own post (even though I was up stupid-late last night being excited about things, so I am going to do things like write "up-stupid late").

Why is this book relevant to you AT ALL? Well, they're going to start filming a movie version of it with Cate Blanchett and Mia Wasikowska (it's going to be called Carol, apparently, which is an alternate title of the book anyway). So if you like those ladies, you might want to read this beforehand.

SO. Book. What are you.

From the cover we can tell that, oh, this appears to be a book about a young woman, perhaps set in the past, and she seems ANXIOUS about something. Oh my, I wonder what.

The girl is Therese, the year is 1953 (or thereabouts), and she starts out the book working in a department store, like you see in the movie Elf. Only she works in the doll department and doesn't believe in Santa as far as I know. She's 21, is trying to get work as a set designer in the theatre, and is thoroughly depressed by her job. Mainly because of the atmosphere of the Corporate Environment and the people she sees who've worked there for years, stuck in the same rut.

So you know something's going to change for her, because 1) This book would be extraordinarily boring otherwise, and 2) She really doesn't want to end up like her co-workers.

This beginning made me a bit nervous, as I very much do not like depressing novels. Or novels where someone is in a depressing situation and the author is trying to Show Something by not getting her out of it. BUT, I soldiered on, because I knew something about this book, and that is the reason I picked it up (aside from the primary fact actually that Sue Perkins recommended it via twitter).

Slight spoiler, I guess, but it's the one I had going in and you don't know HOW it's going to happen; you just know it's going to happen: this is a lesbian novel that ends happily. "WHAT?" you thunder. Yes, I know. Or you would thunder if you were aware of every other book surrounding this time period and before it that had to do with this subject. I mean, if two people are engaging in a morally degenerate situation,  you surely don't want them to end up HAPPY at the end? Think of the CHILDREN.

This was indeed written in the early 1950s, and if I might quote Patricia Highsmith from the afterword (it gives nothing away that I haven't already):

"Prior to this book, homosexuals male and female in American novels had had to pay for their deviation by cutting their wrists, drowning themselves in a swimming pool, or by switching to heterosexuality (so it was stated), or by collapsing—alone and miserable and shunned—into a depression equal to hell."

So, y'know. That wasn't ideal.

Ok, so Therese is working at this doll counter, and then one day she sees this beautiful, fancy-looking lady and she freaks out, sells the woman (Carol) a doll, writes her a card, and they go out for lunch. Then Therese starts going over to Carol's house all the time. Which is weird, but ok. And Carol's fine, but distant, and she seems fairly condescending, and it just makes you feel kind of awkward and like "Thereeeeese, I don't want you to get huuurt," because the book's all third person limited narration or whatever that was that I learned in 6th grade English, so you identify with Therese, and when she buys Carol an expensive handbag and Carol's later like "You didn't have the money for this; you shouldn't have bought it," you CRINGE.


Basically they end up going on a road trip from New York, and they cover a lot of the country. And it's totally great and something I want to do. And then really stressful, bastardy 1950s things happen, BUT THEN the last 20 pages. Oh, last 20 pages. You make this book. The cover says it inspired Lolita, which, I don't know about that, but there are definite similarities. Only, y'know. No pedophilia. Which I think should give it a leg up really.

There's a big long quote in it, but people don't read big long quotes, so here's the tail end of it, which I thought summed things up quite nicely (go 1950s Highsmith):

But the most important point I did not mention and was not thought of by anyone—that the rapport between two men or two women can be absolute and perfect, as it can never be between man and woman, and perhaps some people want just this, as others want that more shifting and uncertain thing that happens between men and women.



So. I liked it. It's not The Well of Shitty Loneliness. That book I picked up off the library shelf, walked away to check it out, started reading the first page, AND IT WAS SO BAD I turned around and put it back on the shelf. This is not that. This is well-written and thought-provoking and ahead of its time and all that jazz. Hurrah.

I haven't listened to any Toby Keith today, and that, my friends, is a miracle

Not going to bed yet. For reasons. So here's something I've dredged up because Netflix just recommended yet another terrible lesbian movie to me, and look, I get that it's an underfunded genre and maybe the people with the most to say are just terrible at saying it, but THAT IS NO EXCUSE FOR THIS SORT OF THING.

There's a movie called I Can't Think Straight (GET IT?) about these two girls and they meet, get all interested in each other, and then ZING revelations/family issues/empowerment for all. In terms of the genre, it's ACTUALLY not terrible. Which is why I own it. But the scene where the sister of one of the girls realizes said sister is gay is maybe the worst thing ever. She's in her sister's room and has this ah-ha moment prompted by various books and CDs that are innocuously piled up/displayed.

"Waaaait, Sarah Waters? Jeanette Winterson? A BOOK THE DIRECTOR WROTE?"

"I feel like these MEAN something..."

"OMG IT ALL BECOMES CLEAR NOW."

Really? Really.

But it also has this:

And that's damn cute. So you win, terribly-written movie.

Telegraph Avenue: The Patriotic Readalong (or something)

Ok, People About to Celebrate the Kind of Birth of Our Country (and others). Tuesdays for this month are going to be me posting about the Michael Chabon Readalong hosted by Emily at As the Crowe Flies and Reads. She's an awesome actual bookseller lady, so she got ARCs of his new book out in September, Telegraph Avenue.

Today's the intro post.

I decided to do this because ARCs make me feel special (TREMBLE, PUNY POPULACE AS I READ THINGS BEFORE YOU) and I haven't read Chabon before BUT he's all respected and such. As opposed to, like, the ARC of that YA author who writes about how a teen girl is really into this guy BUT THEN HE LIKES SOMEONE ELSE FOR A WHILE NO (you totally know which author I mean).

The cover's fairly awesome, as you can see below:

Look how red it is!

 So that's a +1 from me.

The first sentence makes me think it might be about race relations. Because a white kid and a black kid are mentioned. IN THE FIRST SENTENCE. So we shall see.

For the rest of you, since readalongs you're not a part of can be boring, I will always have something special for you. Think of me like a dad going on a business trip, and that part sucks, 'cause business = boring and then your dad's not there to drive you places, BUT THEN HE BRINGS YOU BACK SOMETHING, and that part's awesome.

So here y'go, kids:

 

*ruffles your hair, then goes to drink a vodka gimlet and read the paper*

"And my buns -- they don't feel nothin' like steel."

And a happy Beginning of This Awkward 4th of July Week to you all. My current plans for this weirdass no-work-on-Wednesday-but-then-back-Thursday situation are to sit around and do nothing. AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE. When they passed the Declaration of Independence, surely what they wanted was for a 21st century American girl to sit around in sleepy shorts and a superhero t-shirt, watching Designing Women and not worrying about the damn British knocking on the door and quartering their troops on the couch she's using to store her Pop Chips.

There was a Clueless "watchalong" (if you will) this weekend, with Laura from Devouring Texts, Alley from What Red Read, and Megs from The Terrible Desire. If you weren't there and right now're like "HEY!", all I have to say is the announcement went out on twitter. WHY DO YOU PEOPLE HATE TWITTER.

This is what you get when you have a Clueless watchalong on Skype chat:

Alley: who has a drawer just full of

turkey like that?

Megs: RICH people.

And Megs's endless quest to have people punched in the face:

Alice: "I think that I remember Hamlet accurately."

Megs: Punch her in the face, Josh!

Megs: Ooooo...he kissed her instead.

Alley: he punched her with his lips

Alice: stop calling her girly!

asshole DMV instructor

Megs: Punch him in the face!

Megs: That was way harsh, Tai.

Megs: I'm outy.

Megs: Punch her in the face!

Alley: this guy prob shouldn't be making

fun of/being an asshole to his boss's daughter

Megs: Protect her honor, Josh!

Megs: Punch him in the face!

Laura: PUNCH ALL THE PEOPLE

Megs: There's not enough face-punching in

this movie.

Alley: clearly

It was good times.

I freaked out about the end of June and finished True Grit and The Price of Salt. Basically I love True Grit's short, no-contractions face off. It's pretty much The Sisters Brothers, but not at all similar except they both are set in the West, only one's wayyy more West than the other. But I think I can say if you liked one, you'll like the other, and if you hated Sisters Brothers because you have no soul and cannot appreciate the plaintive cry of a cowboy's song, then you will not enjoy True Grit. Even though it features Rooster Cogburn: Complicated Man and General of Badassery. WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO PLEASE YOU.