Randomness, and books!
May. 12th, 2011 01:02 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
olde_fashionedLately I haven't been in the mood for navel gazing, so I figure I'd better take advantage of a lark while I have it, and give a real life update. ;)
I'm sick (again), probably bronchitis since my coughs usually turn into that. I'm over-worked, under-paid, tired, tired of having to work so much, and tired of being tired. I've had to call out sick a number of times during these past two weeks thanks to my good old friend the nasty cough.
The only good thing about this is I've had some time to actually read for a change, and finally finished The Scarlet Pimpernel (which I was getting sick of seeing on my sidebar, heh). Not a bad book, but definitely better in the general concept than the execution. Lots of generalized descriptions and over-used phrases which I found highly annoying, most especially Orczy's habit of describing Chauvlin as "fox-like" and perpetually having him rub his "long, bony fingers together". Yes, we know he's the villain. No, I don't need to be reminded of it every other page.
Now I've embarked on David McCullough's 1776, which I had to abandon 66 pages in three years ago (stupid library renewal limits). Actually owning a copy entirely removes any pressure from having to finish it by a certain time frame, which is lovely. I'm already past my previous point of progress, and am once again reminded of how heroic our Founding Fathers were. The things they endured! We have much to be grateful for, and very large shoes to fill. In the case of George Washington, I know he's generally lauded, but goshhe's wonderful--I think they broke the mold after he was born.
I almost hate to say this, especially as it's my own fault, but I was hoping for just a teensy bit more of backstory on the beginnings of the war; how it came about, etc. Apparently 1776 is more of an appendix to John Adams, so perhaps the latter has more of the information I'm seeking? Do any of my readers know? It wasn't high up on my reading list, but if his biography also contains a "play-by-play" of the steps leading to war with Britain then it would automatically become more interesting. ;)
Going back over some of my previous book reviews, it's become apparent that I've written considerably less and less of them in recent months. Part of this is natural; I've read less, due to having to work. Another facet of that issue, is it takes me longer to get through a book, which in turn means that my impressions and remarks fade much more quickly. Short of stopping the actual reading process to take scrupulous notes (which I've done, but it's tedious and very disruptive), how do you all prepare for composing book reviews, if you write them?
I'm sick (again), probably bronchitis since my coughs usually turn into that. I'm over-worked, under-paid, tired, tired of having to work so much, and tired of being tired. I've had to call out sick a number of times during these past two weeks thanks to my good old friend the nasty cough.
The only good thing about this is I've had some time to actually read for a change, and finally finished The Scarlet Pimpernel (which I was getting sick of seeing on my sidebar, heh). Not a bad book, but definitely better in the general concept than the execution. Lots of generalized descriptions and over-used phrases which I found highly annoying, most especially Orczy's habit of describing Chauvlin as "fox-like" and perpetually having him rub his "long, bony fingers together". Yes, we know he's the villain. No, I don't need to be reminded of it every other page.
Now I've embarked on David McCullough's 1776, which I had to abandon 66 pages in three years ago (stupid library renewal limits). Actually owning a copy entirely removes any pressure from having to finish it by a certain time frame, which is lovely. I'm already past my previous point of progress, and am once again reminded of how heroic our Founding Fathers were. The things they endured! We have much to be grateful for, and very large shoes to fill. In the case of George Washington, I know he's generally lauded, but goshhe's wonderful--I think they broke the mold after he was born.
I almost hate to say this, especially as it's my own fault, but I was hoping for just a teensy bit more of backstory on the beginnings of the war; how it came about, etc. Apparently 1776 is more of an appendix to John Adams, so perhaps the latter has more of the information I'm seeking? Do any of my readers know? It wasn't high up on my reading list, but if his biography also contains a "play-by-play" of the steps leading to war with Britain then it would automatically become more interesting. ;)
Going back over some of my previous book reviews, it's become apparent that I've written considerably less and less of them in recent months. Part of this is natural; I've read less, due to having to work. Another facet of that issue, is it takes me longer to get through a book, which in turn means that my impressions and remarks fade much more quickly. Short of stopping the actual reading process to take scrupulous notes (which I've done, but it's tedious and very disruptive), how do you all prepare for composing book reviews, if you write them?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-05-12 11:12 pm (UTC)Hmm--unfortunately I don't remember John Adams as talking in much detail about the steps leading up to the war either, focusing mostly on personal or cultural struggles (Adams became estranged from several old friends due to the war). If you want a book that traces the beginning of the war you'll probably have to read one ofthese.
* hands you lemonade and hot soup *
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 06:07 am (UTC)Okay...scratch that then. It can go back down towards the bottom of the list... And thanks for that list! Have you read any of those personally? (You know how much I rely on you!!)
no subject
Date: 2011-05-24 06:02 am (UTC)Unfortunately no, I don't think I've read many of those, since I usually tend to focus on the war itself.
Clearly this means we must both plunge further into 18th century culture, and you know what a dreadful burden that would be ;)
no subject
Date: 2011-05-25 03:56 am (UTC)Thank youuuu....sigh.
And yes, what a tragedy, immersing one's self even deeper into the century dearest to our hearts! ;P
no subject
Date: 2011-05-12 11:58 pm (UTC)I do take down pages numbers and quotes too using tiny post-it-notes. Terribly handy items to have while reading imho.
Hope you feel better soon!
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 06:12 am (UTC)One of my other as-yet-to-be-written reviews I did take detailed notes, complete with page numbers!
Thanks!
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 01:24 am (UTC)Yes, it is. That's why I bought a copy of The Picture of Dorian Gray. I wanted to have plenty of time to take time to read it. If that makes sense.
When I saw 1776 in your tags for this post, I thought "huh?" Then I read it and see that you are picking it back up again. I thought you had finished it.
I was considering do that myself. I think what will help it from being disruptive is at the end of your reading session, write your impressions. That way you can read though until you want to stop and then do it. I like to read a chapter or two at a time. At the end of those one or two, I can write my impressions.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 07:55 am (UTC)Ahh, yes. I probably had to return it to the library about the time you stopped LJing, no?
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 02:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 01:54 am (UTC)And I'll just say that the musical has some lovely songs, even though the book of it is terrible. You must listen to "When I look at you" if you've never heard it.
I can't comment on the John Adams thing. Both of those books are on my to be read pile. I just finished First Family: Abigail and John Adams by Joseph J. Ellis. But that isn't what you want if you are looking for a play-by-play of the revolution.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 07:57 am (UTC)I'm aware of the musical, but haven't tried any of it yet. I'll have to look that song up!
Yeah, if I want an Adams bio I know who to go to. ;) I'm looking for something about the war in general.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-14 06:52 am (UTC)My first exposure to SP was the musical (well the CD). Then I read the book and saw the 1930s film version, which is decent. Next I saw the Andrews/Seymour version and that is by far the best. Somewhere around in here I learned the book of the musical was written like a bad American sitcom. And then the Richard E. Grant version is just ... don't bother.
All in all I'm very impressed with what they did in Andrews/Seymour. It's true to the original's spirit while correcting its failings.
The best of the musical:
"When I Look at You"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJMmDdGlGY4
"Into the Fire"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrqCAO4BYe8
no subject
Date: 2011-05-15 10:13 pm (UTC)I've seen the Leslie Howard/Merle Oberon version, which wasn't dreadful, but somewhat lackluster. I tried not to think "ASHLEY WILKES!" every time LH was onscreen.
The Anthony Andrews/Jane Seymour version is indeed the best! And that end scene with Chauvlin getting "undressed" at the point of Sir Percy's sword is just priceless (as are his perpetual digs at the French fashions)!
I tried to like the Richard E. Grant/Elizabeth McGovern version, but ugh, it was just so wrong on so many different levels. Grant wasn't a bad Fop!Percy, but he lacked something to completely round out the character. As for McGovern, I was shocked at how much I hated her performance (even moreso after having recently watched Downton Abbey and liking her very much!). Marguerite was supposed to be exquisite and charming! Not petulant and grumpy. She had none of the elegance that the character required, which really ruined the series for me. The costumes were also lackluster, save for Emilia Fox's FABULOUS boysenberry-hued ensemble. ;)
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 02:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 07:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 04:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 07:59 am (UTC)And ooh, Wharton!! I've heard her compared to Austen, yet I didn't like The Age of Innocence at all when I watched the movie. Tell me the book is better...?!
As for reading something good...have you read North & South yet?
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 05:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 08:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 03:06 pm (UTC)I was skeptical at first when a friend told me to watch 1776 but I was delightfully surprised. It's not cheesy.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-15 05:24 am (UTC)hehehe
no subject
Date: 2011-05-15 06:43 am (UTC)(However I did just get a huge kick out of the letter of Washington's that they read--I was just on that part in the book 1776, where he mentions wishing himself in a wigwam! LOL!)
no subject
Date: 2011-05-13 11:05 pm (UTC)I do hope you feel better! Are there any clinics in CA you can go to that cater to any low income people? I know here in New Mexico you can go and they'll treat you for half of the cost. Since I'm unemployed and when I went to the hospital last year and I was enrolled in the state coverage program and only can go to the clinic's at the University of New Mexico, but the doctors there are pretty good. I don't have a co-pay and my meds are $5 if I need any and overall hospital stays with exams is $25 a day.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-15 06:47 am (UTC)There might be, but I haven't looked. Thanks for the suggestion, though. :)
no subject
Date: 2011-05-16 05:04 am (UTC)You can find Thomas Paine's Common Sense over at the gutenberg project. Most historians will say it's a propaganda piece and rightly so, but I think it does so much more and it's a pity some call it that because I don't think it really is.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-17 03:35 am (UTC)Glad to have a friend vouch for a historian--there's nothing worse to me than a dry bore who tries to distill history down to whatever level of idiocy they want.
Ahhh, I love that site, but it's hard on my eyes!!! And ink is so expensive, so I can't print it out. I'll just get it from the library (I refuse to buy an Nook/Kindle/JobKiller, grrr).
Well wasn't The Federalist Papers also technically a propaganda piece? When I read that, it did kind of smack of CHANGE YOUR MIND YE SINNERS!!! but at the same time it was fascinating to get a glimpse into 18th century reasoning.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-17 06:37 am (UTC)I love my Sony e-reader & wouldn't give it up! I still buy books though and prefer them, but honestly if I ever were to head back to the UK for a PhD-all my fun books to read would have to be done and bought for the e-reader only because there's no way I could justify buying a book and moving back with TONS of them. It is bad enough I had to leave behind so many history related books.
You might be able to find a very cheap copy of Paine at a used bookstore-maybe a library. I know I don't have Paine or I'd offer to send you my copy, but alas I don't have him.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-19 06:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-15 01:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-15 06:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-15 04:44 pm (UTC)As for Batman, I think he might be my favorite "super hero" ever. (I've been following your journal for a while, so I already know he's definitely your favorite.) It's so much more believable that a man of good fortune would use his money to create a host of crime-fighting gadgets, than that a high school boy would get bitten by a radio-active spider, or that an alien baby from a dying planet would get shipped to Earth by his parents.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-15 10:32 pm (UTC)If we're going to get REALLY technical, I'd argue that Zorro is more akin to Robin Hood (rob the rich, feed the poor, etc.), while TSP is trying to snatch lives from the jaws of Madame Guillotine. Both worthy causes, but what TSP's doing is a little harder.
Yup, you are correct, and I'm glad you agree! Your reasoning is also mine; there's no virtue in someone who is impervious to bullets taking a hit for someone. Spiderman is arguably more heroic than Superman, but Batman trumps them all IMO. (I read an interesting piece in a fascinating book (http://www.amazon.com/Batman-Philosophy-Knight-Blackwell-Culture/dp/0470270306/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1305498447&sr=1-1). It argued that for similar reasons to those I just listed above, that Superman's "sacrifice" is significantly less than that of Batman, because he has much less at stake. He's not going to die stopping crime, while every night Batman goes out on patrol could be his last. Definitely worth a read, even if you think it might be lame (I did), but it was surprisingly intellectual and thought-provoking.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-16 02:16 am (UTC)I think you're right about Zorro and Robin Hood. (HOW did I forget about Robin and his band of merry men?!)
Batman and Philosophy? :D Lame or no, it does sound entertaining . . .
no subject
Date: 2011-05-17 03:31 am (UTC)LOL! Robin Hood is almost cliche, now, perhaps that's why. I never was particularly enamored of him; perhaps it's the green, versus the black. >;)
I thought it would be lame, but it wasn't! I'd definitely check it out (literally, from a library at least)!
no subject
Date: 2011-05-18 01:16 am (UTC)I agree that black is far more fascinating than green.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-19 06:12 am (UTC)What is it about books from the early 20th century that have that element of corniness??
no subject
Date: 2011-05-21 04:14 am (UTC)I don't know why 1900-esque books have their own special brand of corniness. I guess every era has its own goofy quirks. I know ours has a ton. :(
no subject
Date: 2011-05-22 07:31 pm (UTC)Yes, each era definitely has it's "distinguishing characteristics". Georgians liked rambling run-on sentences and capitalizing words like "Honour" and "Beauty". Victorians never knew when to shut up when describing something; they also like "literary allusions" (Gaskell is especially good/bad at this). More modern literature likes to be as shocking and sexualized as possible. Contemporary fiction (I refuse to say literature) seems to equate greatness with foul language and the breaking of all the rules of grammar and punctuation (*coughCormacMcCarthycough*). Hmm...
no subject
Date: 2011-05-22 08:26 am (UTC)Hope to talk to you soon. :) *hugs*
no subject
Date: 2011-05-22 07:32 pm (UTC)Bronchitis is still goin' strong--it's a 4-6 weeks deal, and I've only just entered the fourth week. Siiiiiigh.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-22 08:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-22 08:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-22 08:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-22 08:10 pm (UTC)And no--my brother had bronchitis and pneumonia at the same time, and they gave him an inhaler and told him to take an OTC decongestant. The latter is what I've been on, also cough medicine.
no subject
Date: 2011-05-22 08:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-05-25 04:01 am (UTC)