Emma

This beautiful item was a birthday gift from a couple of friends of mine. It is absolutely wonderful! SJW had found the first four issues online, but I refused to read it until I could read it in full, which is what is collected in this beautiful volume. It tells the story of Emma without deviating from the novel too obviously. There are a few points that weren't mentioned, that I would have liked to see in, such as the fact that Mrs Bates was the widow of the previous vicar of Highbury. The lack of John Knightley and the children's second visit was a bit annoying, but worked very well. Like most movie adaptations, one has to accept that an adaptation does things differently. Particularly in the way that backstory is dealt with, which I think this did very well. The way they kept referring to Mr Elton as the rector annoyed me, but I suspect it's due to the language differences between the UK and the US. I must admit that the US spelling did not bother me in the slightest.

The art was not brilliant, but managed to capture the style of the characters and the feeling of the book. I would've preferred it to be a little less cartoony and a little more realistic, but that's simply a matter of individual taste. I occasionally had a little difficulty distinguishing the men from each other, particularly in the case of the Knightley brothers, but I imagine they would look quite similar.

If you enjoy Austen and graphic novels, then this is a must! I shall have to locate the others in the series, so far Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility.

Yet more challenges!

The hard part about this challenge, was choosing my theme. Books written before 1960, not a problem. At least two authors, not a problem. Mystery books, not a problem. Picking a theme, a problem! So, because I can't decide, I have decided to do two of the themes!

The first theme I picked was Colourful Crime - 8 books that have a colour in the title. The second theme was Lethal Locations - 8 books about places. I think this'll be fun and I find myself wondering if I have any books I haven't read yet that fit the descriptions.

Lethal Locations:

1. The Secret of Spiggy Holes by Enid Blyton (1940). As the title suggests, this book is all about Spiggy Holes and what happens there. And children's mystery stories are still mystery stories.
2. The Secret Mountain by Enid Blyton (1941). This one is about a mountain.

I have plenty of others if you include books I've already read, but I don't really want to do that, so I'll have to be on the look out for these.

Next up is the Medieval Challenge. Twelve books across four categories. I have chosen a provisional list of:

1. Beowulf (literature).
2. The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer (literature).
3. The Confessions by St Augustine of Hippo (biography).
4. The Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri (allegory).
5. The Mabinogion (literature).
6. Le Morte d'Arthur by Thomas Mallory (romance).
7. The Nibelungenlied (literature).
8. The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli (philosophy). This is a multi-challenge book and is featured on the classics challenge and the new author challenge as well.
9. The Poetic Edda (literature).
10. The Prose Edda by Snorri Sturluson (literature).
11. The Romance of the Rose by Guillaume de Lorris (allegory).
12. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight (romance).

Of course, my ability to do this hinges on my ability to find English translations of the works. Now I just need to remember to sign up on December 30th.

Next up is the Library challenge. I have three local libraries at the moment, though that might change next year. At the moment my libraries are the UCT Library, the Vredehoek library and the Central Cape Town Library.

Either way, I'm aiming for Level 4, 37+ library books, none of which are rereads.

Closely associated (it uses the same picture so I haven't included a separate one for it), is the Banned/Challenged challenge. Looking at the lists of books, I'm going to read:

1. To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee. This is a reread, but again a book I haven't read since high school.
2. The Catcher in the Rye by JD Salinger. This is a multi-challenge book also featured on the new author challenge.
3. The Great Gatsby by F Scott Fitzgerald. Another book I read in high school and haven't read since then.
4. Animal Farm by George Orwell. It's ridiculous that I haven't read this yet. This is a multi-challenge book as Orwell is part of my new author challenge.
5. Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck. Another book I read in school. Apparently I went to an awesome school that made us read lots of apparently controversial works. Who knew?
6. 1984 by George Orwell. This is a multi-challenge book. In addition to Orwell being a new author, this is part of my classics challenge.
7. Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov.
8. Lord of the Flies by William Golding.
9. The Old Man and the Sea by Ernest Hemingway.
10. The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck.
11. The Awakening by Kate Chopin.
12. Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad.
13. Beloved by Toni Morrison.
14. Frankenstein by Mary Shelley.
15. Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell. Seriously? This is a challenged book? It's a multi-challenge book, at any rate, being part of my classics challenge.
16. A Separate Peace by John Knowles.
17. The Colour Purple by Alice Walker.
18. The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer. This is a multi-challenge work, being featured in the medieval challenge above.
19. The Age of Innocence by Edith Wharton. This is a multi-challenge item, because Edith Wharton is one of my new authors.
20. A Room with a View by EM Forster.
21. Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier. Another multi-challenge work, this is part of the classics challenge.
22. Schindler's List by Thomas Keneally. Another from the new author challenge.
23. The Portrait of a Lady by Thomas Hardy. Also from the new author challenge. I think I'm only going to post more titles now if they're already part of another challenge or I already own them, or I'll be here all day.
24. Sons and Lovers by DH Lawrence.

I guess I'm going to sign up for 37+ and I'll just have to remember to check if the book I'm reading counts as one of them.

Lastly (for today anyway), is this library challenge, which will have main monthly challenges and mini-challenges. And you have to read 12 library books (at least), so just one a month. Seems easy enough.

2012 Classics Challenges

I do like my reading challenges, and I like reading classics. So these seem like a perfect choice for me.

For the first challenge, I need to read seven classics in 2012, of which only 3 may be rereads.

Herewith, my list of classics and why I'm choosing to read them.

1. Villette by Charlotte Bronte.

I recently 'inherited' my grandmother's Bronte collection, which belonged to her father. Inherit is a funny word though, because she's still very much alive, but I don't know what else to call it. Anyway, the only Bronte I've ever finished was Jane Eyre, and the only other one I've tried to read is Wuthering Heights. I hear this is a good one and that it was Charlotte Bronte's last, so hopefully it'll be a good read.

2. Bleak House by Charles Dickens.

The only Dickens I've ever finished was Great Expectations (unless you count the radio play of A Christmas Carol) and I wasn't terribly impressed. I've heard good things about Bleak House though, and I plan to one day watch the movie, so hopefully it'll be a good read.

3. Middlemarch by George Eliot

I started this, but didn't finish it because I lost interest. Sometimes I find that if I go back to a book a year or two later, it's far more interesting. Eliot writes very well, and this is the favourite book of some friends of mine, so hopefully I'll finish it this time.

4. The Rainbow by DH Lawrence

I've only read Lady Chatterley's Lover, which was good, but rather too full of philosophical exposition that was no doubt interesting at the time but boring a hundred or so years later. But a friend of mine loves Lawrence, and this is sitting on my shelf, so I will read it in 2012.

5. Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier

Once again, a book I've started but not finished. Everyone raves about this book, so there must be something more to it. So I'll try again and perhaps this time I'll fall in love.

6. The Vicomte de Bragelonne by Alexandre Dumas

The sequel to The Three Musketeers, which I enjoyed greatly (even if it's not as good as the first movie version I saw and never will be, sadly) it's been sitting on my shelf for ages and I'm yet to read it. So 2012 is the year!

7. Uncle Tom's Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe

We got this free with a bunch of other books we bought. I picked it because I hadn't read it yet and I've heard good things about it (it's a classic for a reason, after all). I haven't shown any inclination to actually read it yet and don't know anything about it except that it's set in the US and has something to do with black people (though I might be confusing it with something else), which indicates a shocking lack of knowledge on my part.

The second challenge has slightly more stringent rules regarding what you read.

1. A 19th Century classic. I have chosen The Talisman by Walter Scott. I've only read a couple of Scott's novels and I enjoyed them both, so it seems like a good idea to knock another one off my enormous to-read pile.

2. A 20th Century classic. I have chosen 1984 by George Orwell, because I haven't read it yet and that's just shocking.

3. A classic to reread. I have chosen not to choose something specific for this item. Whichever one I reread first will be it. I predict that it will be something by Austen simply because I'm currently in the middle of Lord of the Rings (again) and books started before 1 January 2012 don't count towards this challenge.

4. A classic play. Oh dear. I hate plays. That's not true. I hate reading plays. It's a requirement for the challenge, however, so I will have to choose one. I have picked The Importance of Being Earnest, by Oscar Wilde. I'm not sure where I'll find it, since I don't buy plays because I don't like to read them, but I'm sure that would be in any halfway decent library (except my own). The reason for my choice is that I was recently in a LARP based on this and it was lots of fun. So now I shall read it and have a greater understanding of the events of the LARP.

5. A classic mystery/horror/crime. This is a tough one. Finding something that could pass for this that I haven't read that is already on my shelves (a challenge I've set for myself, except for the play) is difficult. I have settled on The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde. Another book I started but didn't finish. I don't know exactly what happens but (possible spoilers) I gather there's something about the spirit and a connection to the portrait and it affects his ageing, so he stays perpetually young, which sounds like a mystery to me.

6. A classic romance. Is this a romance in the Austen-style or the Tolkien-style? Either way I have picked Far From the Madding Crowd by Thomas Hardy because I've been trying to find a way to work it into this list since I discovered it's 19th century, not 20th, and the first line on the back of the book says it 'concerns the love affairs'. So it must be a romance, right?

7. A classic that has been translated into English. Not wanting to pick another Dumas (variety is another challenge I've set for myself) I finally found The Prince by Machiavelli. So I will read that, since I seem to be biased towards authors from the UK and the US.

8. A classic award winner. After much rooting around on wikipedia, I've discovered that most literary awards are fairly recent things. So this one will be a reread, but since I haven't read it since high school, I think that's acceptable. The winner is Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell, which one the Pulitzer Prize in 1937.

9. A classic set in a country that I will likely never visit. This looked to be rather difficult, given that my collection tends very heavily to the UK and US, both of which I've been to. However, countries that never existed count, so it was a simple decision to pick Thomas More's Utopia. I did consider Tolkien, but I am trying to choose things I haven't read before and this is something I've been meaning to read for a while now.

Well, that's 16 books to read next year... I suspect I'll be signing up for more challenges as I find them though.

The Wind in the Willows

For some reason I never read this as a child. I think that if I had I would've enjoyed it a lot more. I found it very difficult to enjoy this simply because it makes no sense in so many ways. Animals seem to co-exist peacefully with each other, regardless of food preferences, which is something that I'm willing to forgive. That's pretty much a requirement for this kind of story. Where I lose the suspension of disbelief is where you suddenly get an interaction with humans - not only is the toad put in jail, but he is of the right size to disguise himself as an adult human. I can only think with horror of a toad that size.

All in all, I have to say that this was disappointing in many ways and I really do wish that I'd read it as a child so that I would have the memory of it to help sustain my suspension of disbelief.

Cranford

This is possibly the most boring book I've ever read. It is completely plotless. It's essentially about a town in which the majority of the residents are older women. There is one marriage and far more deaths.

I cannot understand how the BBC has made three adaptations of this. Who on earth would want to watch something where nothing really happens? How did this book attain the status of a classic? It's less interesting than the Vicar of Wakefield and that's saying something.

If you've read this book and enjoyed it enough to want to read it again or see an adaptation of it, please let me know why.

The Three Musketeers

My first encounter with The Three Musketeers was the 1993 Disney movie, which I adored and can still mostly recite, I watched it so many times. I was thrilled to finally have my own copy of the book and devoured it. I was sorely disappointed with what I found, for the movie drastically simplified the plot and made virtually all the characters (Milady particularly) more sympathetic.

King Louis is jealous of the Duke of Buckingham because he believes that Queen Anne is endeavouring to conduct an affair with him. Cardinal Richelieu is jealous of Buckingham because he is in love with the Queen. d'Artagnan's father was not a musketeer. Rochefort is not completely evil and, actually, turns out to be fairly decent despite being one of the Cardinal's men. The Cardinal himself is not evil. The musketeers are not disbanded. Milady is evil, extremely evil. Athos tried to hang her and the two believe each other to be dead. Lord de Winter prevents Milady from reaching Buckingham. Buckingham is assassinated (part of the Cardinal's plan that Milady undertook in case she could not convince him to end the war, which she had no chance to perform because of her brother-in-law). Constance is married and not a lady-in-waiting. She is murdered by Milady. Milady's history is far more heinous than the movie would lead you to believe. The Cardinal is not trying to depose the King. Aramis wishes to enter the (Catholic) Church, Porthos is a buffoon. Buckingham is not planning to invade La Rochelle, he's planning to relieve the Protestants that are under siege from the French Catholics. There are a lot of other characters, and a lot more complications.

On this second reading, I enjoyed the book more. I do not particularly like the style of writing, but I suspect that's an artefact of the translation rather than Dumas, as I have not had the same problem with other books of his. It's an intriguing story, exceedingly complex, with rich characters. How faithfully the book captures the personalities of the people that actually existed (Cardinal Richelieu, Anne of Austria, King Louis XIII, the Duke of Buckingham) I do not know, but it makes them interesting characters that take part believably. None of the main characters (with the possible exception of Milady) is purely good or evil. All are flawed in some way. All are complex and believable, even the curious character that is Milady.

This is a book that's worth reading, though it may need to be read multiple times to appreciate all the detail.

Howards End

This is one of those classic books that people talk about vaguely as being significant for some or other reason and something that, really, everyone should have read, presumably while at school. Considering the vast amount of classic literature one is expected to absorb while at school it's a miracle one finds the time for anything else. While searching for images of the book cover (which is not this one, but this one is pretty and I couldn't find mine) I discovered that the movie stars Anthony Hopkins, Emma Thompson (who I loved together in Remains of the Day) and Helena Bonham-Carter. I shall have to see it now.

Anyway, this book is about class struggle and other social things in turn of the century England. It's exceptionally well written and I'll be on the lookout for other works by Forster in my charity-shop scouring. His writing is evocative and there's an underlying sense of camaraderie that's difficult to explain.

As far as I can tell the class struggle is between rich and poor and where one's social responsibility lies. You have the vulgar, wealthy Wilcox family, concerned only with themselves and their accumulation of wealth and power. There are the Schlegel sisters, academic, concerned and determined to help anyone they deem worthy. Then there are the Basts, proud, downtrodden and victims of prevailing social norms. Mix them altogether and one gets a book reminiscent of Austen at her best.

This is a quiet story. The thing that remains strongest with me is the Tolkienesque (is that really fair, considering Forster predates Tolkien?) description of Howards End and surroundings, the sturdiness of the land and the depressing, ever present removal of humanity from any consciousness of it. At the same time, this is one of those books that provokes subtle shifts in your subconscious without your permission or your notice. Read it, it's worth it.

Little Town on the Prairie

This is the seventh book in this series and so far, though I've not read all the previous six, it's my favourite. Laura, author and main character ages from 14 at the beginning of the book to very nearly 16 at the end. Calm, sedate Mary goes off to the school for the blind in Iowa and while her family might miss her, it doesn't really affect the rest of the book.

This is the book that takes a step away from the intense focus on the immediate Ingalls family and starts to really interact with others. Laura and younger sister Carrie attend the local school and form friendships with other children there. The family again spends the winter in town, though this is a far milder winter than the previous one they experienced (see The Long Winter), and as a result they are far more social. At least part of this may be due to the fact that there are far more families in the area than there were the previous year.

Anyway, it's a classic series that you really should read. It's also worth reading from an adult perspective, in my opinion, if you enjoy historical stories.

The Two Towers

I love this book. It's my favourite part (I know, I said the same about Fellowship and I'll probably say it again for RotK). One of the most interesting things about it is, in the words of a truly awful song, 'there's no beginning, there'll be no end' ('Love is All Around' by Wet Wet Wet, if you're wondering). This is the middle of the story and there is no real beginning and no real end - those are in the other books. This dives right in to the adventure and makes no attempt to tie the ends off. It does, in fact, end off on a cliffhanger.

I am particularly fond of the last chapter, The Choices of Master Samwise. It's such a fascinating insight into the relationship between Sam and Frodo from Sam's perspective. It's also interesting to see the way in which Sam considers his choices and eventually decides what it is that he's supposed to do. There's something poignant about the whole chapter, as Sam grieves and then finds his strength. His confusion is so real and the whole section is incredibly moving.

I'm also extremely fond of anything that involves Eowyn. She's the single major female character in the entire volume. I love Eowyn. She loves and she despairs. She's bound by the culture and the time period in which she lives and yet she manages still to be headstrong and independent. I love watching her character develop. Even though, in this book, one merely glimpses her a few times, one can feel her strength and her desperation behind the scenes and from what people say about her. At least, I think you can, I may be projecting because I've read it so many times I know the characters better than I know myself.

Of course, the heroes of Gondor and Rohan appear here for the first time. Faramir and Eomer. Both are honest, law-abiding men. And yet they're not afraid to bend the laws of their countries (and, really, as heir-apparent in both cases they're probably two of the few who can). These are strong, confident men who trust in their judgement. They believe that they can tell the truth of your intentions and what is best and right to do. They will not take the easy path. They will always do what they believe is right. These are the kind of men that you want to have as your leaders.

My extra super favouritest thing about this book? Merry and Pippin in Fangorn Forest with the ents. I love Treebeard's speeches. I love the contrast of the tiny, quick hobbits with the enormous, deliberating ents. I love love love the scene where the party from Helm's Deep arrives on the edge of the ruin of Isengard and is greeted by the hobbits. The reaction of the Fellowship members and Theoden, with Gandalf amused in the background is something that I read two or three times every time.

I could probably write a ten page essay on the things I love about this book, but I won't. I'll just leave you with the highlights.

Lady Chatterley's Lover

I just finished this in the bath and find myself both disappointed and enchanted.

Why am I disappointed? This book has been called pornographic and a great many other insulting and unpleasant things. Perhaps it says something about the world we live in that words like 'fuck' and 'penis' simply aren't that shocking. The sex scenes were not graphic and there was nothing pornographic and, as far as I can tell, nothing that came close. Of course, I'm not exactly an expert in such things, all I can say is that fanfic (of any genre) is generally far more graphic.

Why then am I enchanted? For a multitude of reasons. There's something distinctly Tolkienish about the world in the book. The slow steady creep of industrialisation and the loss of trees and fields. Every second passage brought Tolkien to my mind. Also, this is a well-written love story that also manages to encapsulate all the uncertainty there was between the two world wars, particularly as regards the English class system. Already the system was breaking down, as industrialisation spread and filthy trade became more important than the landed gentry.

In short, this is a wonderfully written romance that covers series topics as well. Also, there are one or two intimate scenes that are heart-warming (there are others that make you wonder whether or not the protagonists are actually having sex or not, which is not how I understand pornography to work). It's worth reading because it's a classic and because of the impact it had on literature in general. It's also worth reading because it's a good story, if somewhat slow and detached from the world in which we live now.

The Fellowship of the Ring

I just finished rereading FotR in my annual(ish) reread of LotR. I finished it in the bath, actually, an incredible feat given that our water was mysteriously switched off this afternoon and was disgustingly muddy when it finally came back on.

I must say that this is, in many ways, my favourite volume in the series (though I'll probably say that about them all). While I'm all for considering the entire work as a whole, as I understand Tolkien did, they are divided into the three volumes and I've already considered the work as a whole.

I love this volume. I love the descriptions of the landscapes. I love the hobbits. I am a hobbit in many ways (though I do wish I could enjoy both cooking and gardening in a slightly more balanced, continuous way, rather than the off-and-on way I do now). I would probably fit in very well at Rivendell as well, devouring all those stories (I sometimes see myself as Sam, being tutored by Bilbo and getting completely wrapped up in tales), though no one would ever mistake me for an elf.

I find many parts of the book beautiful, occasionally sad and frequently wistful. There's an autumnal quality to this first volume, particularly as you enter into Book II with the death of Gandalf, the twilight nature of Lothlorien (don't ask me to explain that, because I can't) and the eventual breaking of the fellowship. It really does seem to be the ending of an Age (and, really, it is the beginning of the end of the Third Age of Middle Earth) and that is probably why I always turn back to it in Autumn.

This is probably the volume I reread most, particularly the beginning (except for the Tom Bombadil chapters, which I frequently thoroughly despise and skip without reservation) with the apparently idyllic Shire (how I'd love to live there) and the adventure and excitement of setting out - both on a perfectly lovely walking trip and on an Adventure. It appeals to me in every respect. If only dear old Carolyn Stewart (whatever happened to her?) had given me this instead of The Hobbit, I'd have been happier and Tolkienified (I just made that up, can you tell?) much earlier. I particularly enjoy rereading this after watching the movie (definitely my favourite of the three, almost without comparison [I'm very attached to the sections on Rohan in TTT movie]) as the depth and intricacy is so much clearer after that pale reflection.

The Name of the Rose

I got this book out of the library because Bum recommended it to me. He said that given how much I enjoyed the monastic mystery solving in the Cadfael Chronicles, I would probably enjoy this as well.

I'm really not sure how I feel about this book. The plot is good. The characters are wonderful. The style, however, annoys me. I don't mind the fact that the book is written from the point of view of one of the characters when he's grown old. I do object to the first section that sets up the whole "OMG! I found a really old manuscript!" thing that so many books seem to do. Sometimes it works, most of the time it just irritates (me). There are long ponderous sections that drag on and seem uninteresting. Was the heretic/inquisition side-plot necessary? All it did was increase my ire towards organised religion. Was the 'all women are evil' dialogue really necessary? I understand that many religious people in the Middle Ages may have felt that way, but this book was written in a time when attitudes are supposed to have changed. There's no need to have the attitudes of the Middle Ages changed, but there's really no need to explicitly state their views on the worthlessness and iniquity of women.

Like I said, I'm really not sure how I feel about this book. But you should probably read it anyway.

Emma

There's a charity book fair at the V&A Waterfront this weekend. You should go and buy books. I'm going to (because that's a surprise).

Anyway, Emma is not one of my favourite Austen's. I enjoy the book and I like the characters but I can't stand to reread it very often. This is because Emma's behaviour makes me cringe. It's just embarrassing. Having read it multiple times I know what the reality of everyone's behaviour is and to read Emma misreading virtually everything around her and being so oblivious to the truth is just too much. I can't handle it very often. And the Box Hill scene! Emma's snobbery and unthinking cruelty is just too painful for me to read. Mrs Elton's snobbery, pretentiousness and so on is hysterically funny. And dear Miss Bates is such a font of information if you only know what she's really saying (particularly since she usually doesn't).

If you haven't read Emma, I recommend it.

Father Brown

I imagine you're all astonished that with my constant posting, there was not a single thing written here yesterday. I am less surprised, as I know that I went to CAFDA yesterday. I must admit that it was the hardest time I've ever had spending money there. Usually the books pile up within minutes, but it took me about half an hour to find the first one. The advantage of this, of course, is that I pick up all sorts of unlikely things. I will say that I found a lovely (though unillustrated) copy of Fellowship of the Ring, so I can now read LotR in the bath quite happily until I get to Return of the King.

I picked up two volumes of short stories, which I do very rarely. The only other volume of short stories I own is a collection of Agatha Christie's Poirot from before he had full length novels of his own (I'll review those sometime). These were written by GK Chesterton, who I thought only wrote non-fiction and religious non-fiction at that (I have a biography he wrote of St Francis that I'll review sometime as well). These are stories of a Catholic priest who solves mysteries/crimes. They are somewhat reminiscent of Cadfael, except that the similarities end with the Catholic crime-solver bit. Father Brown lives in the 19th Century and drifts slowly and dreamily through mysteries solving them through intuition and a knowledge of human nature. He reminds me a great deal of Hercule Poirot, who I was particularly reminded of when I saw the full name of a major character - the Frenchman Hercule Flambeau. Rather makes you wonder about Christie's inspiration.

There are lovely, simple detective stories without the gory violence we've become accustomed to these days. A break for those tired of the violent descriptions so prevalent in modern detective fiction. Also, a good introduction to the genre for younger readers, as it combines crime and occasionally murder with a detective without too descriptive violence, no sex and less intricate plotting and fewer characters than Poirot.

Mansfield Park

A good long time ago, before I read Northanger Abbey, this was my least favourite Jane Austen. It has since grown on me, such that it's one of my favourites. Austen's novels are, for me, divided into three categories: favourites (Persuasion, Sense and Sensibility, Mansfield Park), enjoyed (Pride and Prejudice, Emma) and disliked (Northanger Abbey). I imagine every Austenite has their own division of the novels, but I imagine to the non-initiated, the fact that Pride and Prejudice is not the automatic favourite of every lover of Austen may be surprising.

Anyway, I was recently watching MP1 and was struck by how much better it is than I remember it. It really brings out some aspects of the novel that I think are frequently missed. For a start, Fanny's strength. Fanny Price is generally considered the most insipid of Austen's heroines. She is not outspoken, she is not brave. She is timid and religious in a way that is grating to modern sensibilities. However, what most people don't realise is that she has a strength of character that is overlooked by readers as much as her family. She knows what is right and wrong and she is not prepared to compromise her principles, no matter how you may beg her. She knows that Henry Crawford was inappropriate in his behaviour to the Miss Bertrams and she will not be prevailed on to think otherwise. Unlike Edmund, her eyes are not blinded to the faults of the Crawfords or her own relations because of this strength of character. Fanny is overlooked and unappreciated, yet she does not use that as an excuse to change her behaviour and her attitude to the prevailing one around her. She sticks to her principles and it is this that has endeared her to me over the years. Hers is a quiet strength that requires much observation to be seen.

If you've read Mansfield Park and disliked Fanny, read it again with this in mind. She's still annoyingly timid and preachy, but she's nowhere near as insipid as she appears.

Sense and Sensibility

Since that thing down on the side of my blog says that I'm Elinor Dashwood, I thought it appropriate that I review a Jane Austen. Unsurprisingly I picked Sense and Sensibility. This novel ties with Persuasion for my favourite Jane Austen. Sense and Sensibility is the story of two sisters, Elinor and Marianne (there's a younger sister, Margaret, who is almost a non-character except in the 1995 adaptation). Elinor represents sense, she is responsible and always does her duty. Marianne represents sensibility (closer to sensitivity than sensible), she is emotional and open, everyone knows how she feels and she indulges her emotions at every possible opportunity. The novel is the journey that the sisters take to discovering a middle ground. Marianne learns to appreciate the feelings of other and be less selfish. Elinor learns to occasionally let people in and not always hide her feelings from those close to her. This was the first novel Austen had published and the language reflects that. In places the language is very dense and it's difficult to get into the book, unless you appreciate the language. This is, however, one of Austen's most convoluted and intriguing romances and, in my opinion, one of her best.

The Silmarillion

The first couple of times I (tried to) read this, I was unable to finish it. It's a dense book full of strange names and places and relationships. This is (part of) the history of the elves of Middle Earth. I knew that one day I would make it all the way through, so I bought myself a copy and, when the next Tolkien-phase struck, I delved in. I was obviously of the right frame of mind this time. I made it all the way through and absolutely loved it.

Suddenly, all the weird names and their relationships to each other made sense. I haven't read it nearly as many times as LotR (or even the Hobbit), but it's definitely one I'd read again. This, however, is not a lazy afternoon read. The Silmarillion requires the use of a fair amount of brain power to keep track of who everyone is and why you care about them. It's a fascinating story and an essential read for anyone with an interest in Middle Earth.

The Hobbit

This was my introduction to Tolkien, sometime in primary school. Wandering about the library, one of the student-librarians (Carolyn Stewart for those of you who would know her) suggested I try this. I'm not sure I made it past the first paragraph. I know I didn't make it past the first page. To this day, I still rather dislike the Hobbit.

I've read this book a few times and, like most things, familiarity is tending to make it more and more preferred. It's well-written, a good story, lots of fun and interesting. I'm a rereader. Thankfully I read fast enough that I can reread many books as well as reading many new books. I reread LotR once a year. I reread a fair amount of Enid Blyton and other favourites (Stephanie Plum, In Death, Cadfael Chronicles, etc) every year. Sometimes more often. This book, however, I reread about once every five years. For some reason I just don't enjoy it that much. There's no good reason for it, it's just one of those quirks. I suspect that at least part of my dislike stems from the fact that the narrative is weighted heavily towards the dwarves and Bilbo - the anthropologist in me wants more variety to study.

It's still a book to be recommended. It's just not one I particularly enjoy most of the time.
[On a side note, I had to sift through ten pages of google images to find a picture of the cover I have.]

The Elements of Style

You wouldn't think a style guide would make for good reading. I certainly didn't. But I picked it up, because it's essential for an editor. It's also a good read for anyone who likes to write, enjoys grammar or is studying English. It's made up of a bunch of rules to create forcible writing that is grammatically correct and is concise. I'm a fan of brevity. I don't enjoy either reading or writing waffly, repetitive, unnecessary work.

I enjoyed this, I don't know if you would.

The Lord of the Rings

It's that time of year again. For some reason my thoughts turn towards this book every year around Autumn. Rather like Frodo contemplating adventuring out of the Shire every Autumn. I imagine that LotR is my mental equivalent of comfort food, in somewhat the same way as Enid Blyton is. Also, as I said somewhere previously, I'm somewhat obsessional and my obsessions tend to be cyclical, so I go through a LotR phase every now and then.

My first experience of Tolkien was not a good one. Some years later I was told to read LotR by my Dad, and I did. I loved it. There were some bits that dragged (there still are, but I've read every word multiple times and have no issues with skipping entire chapters if I feel like it), but most of it was phenomenal. I love this book. Until the last few years, I lived at home and read my Dad's copy. Then I moved out. I had no LotR of my own. I was given a beautiful 50th Anniversary edition one year. It's gorgeous. I adore this book. The cover is soft, it has a little box, the edges of the pages are shiny gold, like in very old books and there's a little red ribbon to mark your place. The maps are fantastic, in black and red and there are some images in the book of the pages of the Book of Mazarbul (from the Chamber of Records in Moria). I also have a copy of Two Towers illustrated by Alan Lee. I'd like individual illustrated copies of Fellowship of the Ring and Return of the King as well (by John Howe, preferably, but I'll take Alan Lee as well) - this is a book I like to read in the bath and my single volume is too unwieldy and precious for that.

I like to watch the movies too, despite the many and varied objections I have to it (not the least of which is our missing 2nd half of the Two Towers Extended Edition). It's a fun romp through a book that tugs at the heart strings and evokes all manner of feeling. Also, it's pretty and quicker than reading the book. Of course, no sooner than I watch the movie (again) than I want to read the book (again), so they feed into themselves.

Tolkien's precision and profundity are two of the most enduring qualities of this work. The language is exquisite, the descriptions are evocative, the characters are real. This is a book that stays with me, always. The issues are real and - most importantly - applicable to each and every stage of a person's life. Also, I'd make a very good hobbit.