Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something.

I just finished this book and it was amazing! It's an absolute must-read for fans of the Princess Bride. Cary Elwes is just so stinking charming...you kind of can't help falling in love with him all over again. 

He shares some really interesting facts and anecdotes about the making of the film, which I've always loved. I had a Making of Star Wars VHS that I literally watched until the tape was ruined. So this was right up all of my alleys. 

Some of the most interesting tidbits:

• Everyone really did love making this movie. The book is interspersed with blurbs from the rest of the cast and crew, and they all can only say how much they loved working on this project. 
• Billy Crystal as Miracle Max made Cary Elwes laugh so hard they had to replace his "mostly dead" body with a dummy. He was banished from the set when Billy was filming.
• Andre the Giant was as magical, kind, and HUGE as he appears on film. He was apparently just the nicest guy. One day on set, it was freezing (they filmed on location in England), and Robin Wright was shivering in her red, flowy dress. So Andre went over, placed his enormous hand over her head like a cap, and it warmed her up! 
• Mandy Patinkin (Inigo) and Cary Elwes trained incessantly for the sword duel, and apart from the part where they swing from a bar, the entire duel was performed by both actors, not stuntmen. 
• The scene in the fire swamp where Buttercup's dress catches on fire is actually Robin Wright, and her dress totally did catch on fire. And Cary Elwes did very calmly put it out. 

It was just such a beautiful, joyful, and charming book about a movie that is all the aforementioned adjectives. Absolutely recommend to anyone. 

I also finished Loser by Jerry Spinelli. 

It was a heart-breaking-yet-heart-warming story of a strange boy who has absolutely no idea that he's an oddball. He is, as Spinelli so eloquently put it, "the star of his own life." And aren't we all? This was such a great story...Spinelli is an artist. This book reminded me why I fell so deeply in love with Stargirl. Fans of his other books should definitely check this one out. Not sure where I'd catalog it now that I've read it...it's technically a children's book, but it's just such a work of art that I'm not sure every child would appreciate its depth and beauty. There's not much in the way of plot or major excitement, but I'd definitely recommend it to the right readers. 

Dracula + Sherlock Holmes = ???

My sado-masochistic relationship with Holmes pastiches continues, even though I keep telling myself I don't like it. But secretly, I think I do. 

No, really, I keep hoping I'll find one, JUST ONE, that doesn't totally suck. 

This one came SO. CLOSE. 

My Dad got me this for Christmas, and I was so hopeful. I mean, Dracula AND Sherlock Holmes?! Even if it wasn't faithful to either of the originals, HOW COULD THIS BE A BAD THING?? And then it was by Saberhagen, who I think I read in my sci-fi class (if it wasn't my sci-fi class it was somewhere, but I don't recall where). 

So I start it and it's actually very good. You get the feel of London, the crime isn't outrageous to the point that it couldn't happen, everyone was pretty in character...except Dracula, but how does one write Dracula in character? It's not like Stoker spent a lot of time describing his habits or feelings. He just is. And I applaud Saberhagen for giving him a person outside of being a wall-scaling-blood-sucking creep. 

So we're tramping along, everything is going well. Then we get introduced to the remaining members of The Team for Light and what they're doing after the supposed killing of Dracula. Highly silly, because I don't believe for a minute that Arthur Holmwood/Lord Godalming and Jack Seward somehow ended up in London's underground dog/rat fighting circles. They were really crazily OOC and that bothered me, Dracula being one of my favorite books. 

Then comes the punch line, which I will spoil here. 

SPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERS

Sherlock Holmes's mother had an affair with Dracula's brother and Sherlock was actually half of a set of twins, and the other twin is a vampire, which makes Dracula Sherlock's uncle. 

EXCUSE ME, WTF. 

First of all: nowhere ever in my extensive research of vampire lore have I read that sleeping with a vampire produces twins, one of whom is human and one of whom is a vampire. If you have heard of this before, please, tell me. Even Stephanie Meyers's effed up vampire offspring makes more sense to me. 

Secondly, there is no account in ANY of Doyle's work that Mr. and Mrs. Holmes were anything less than happy and faithful with each other. Also, Sherlock was not a twin. Mr. and Mrs. Holmes had already inflicted the names Mycroft and Sherlock upon actual living babies. There wasn't room for one more absurdly named child in their house, I'm sorry. 

And while it's true that Vlad Tepes/The Impaler historically had two half brothers and a younger brother, nowhere in Stoker's book is there any evidence of vampirism among them (though Saberhagen wasn't the first to think this up. But I don't buy it, especially because Radu, the younger brother, was some kind of possibly gay pretty boy and an enemy of Vlad. MOVING ON.). And even if there was, COME ON. The likelihood of him sleeping with and impregnating Mrs. Holmes (why was she in Transylvania in the first place?)? The whole thing is incredibly far-fetched. 

Also, spoiler, the bad guys are Arthur Holmwood and Jack Seward. Which I guess makes sense...if Dracula is your protagonist, then the good guys from Dracula have to be the bad guys. BUT STILL. Not buying it. 

END SPOILERS END SPOILERS END SPOILERS END SPOILERS END SPOILERS 

So overall, Saberhagen came SO CLOSE. Did I like this book? Yes, of course. Was it true to either of its original sources? Not really, but especially not Dracula, which bothers me. Granted, throwing together Holmes, the epitome of realism, and Dracula, a supernatural being, is like putting oil and water in a cup. You can try and mix it, and it might work for like, a third of a second, but then they separate. I had a hard time believing that Holmes would so readily accept the supernatural, especially having read "The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire," a case which Holmes solved (and therefore disproved vampires) before he even left the house to investigate. 

Saberhagen touches on this story, suggesting that Watson thought this story (of Dracula and Holmes) too outrageous to publish and so wrote "The Sussex Vampire." Certainly, "The Giant Rat of Sumatra" features in this novel. I like books where an author takes one of the many cases Watson mentioned throughout the Holmes canon without expounding upon, and creates a story based off of it. But this was not one of them. 

Anyway, do I recommend it? Yes. It's a fun romp with a very nice "I just need a hug" Dracula and his nephew, Sherlock Holmes. Just don't get all excited thinking it's going to be canonical. Because it will be, up until the last quarter. Then, like a bad football game, it all goes downhill very quickly. 

PS: If you didn't read Dracula and have no idea what I've just talked about, might I suggest my highly ridiculous summary/review?

Potential new least favorite book?

I just read the most heinous book. 

OH MY GOD, I literally can't even talk about how much I LOATHED this book. It was the most vapid, insipid, stupid, brainless waste of paper I've ever had the utter displeasure of reading. 

Not true. Heart of Darkness is still my least favorite book, but this book actually insulted me as a fan of Austen and an educated human being. 

What I hate most about this book is that it masquerades itself as some kind of almighty tribute to Austen, who is probably my favorite author, when really, it's so trite and STUPID that it's insulting to insinuate that you are glorifying her by reading or writing this book, and it's insulting to people who have actually READ all of her books to tout this as some kind of tribute. 

It. Was. TERRIBLE. 

The main girl is a sad, Darcy-obsessed, single woman who wins a trip to Austenland, a place where you can go and literally pretend to be in a Jane Austen book alongside trained actors and everything. Of course, she falls in love with the Darcy character, but without the intrigue and intelligence of the ACTUAL Pride and Prejudice romance. 

Also, Hale repeatedly bashes Northanger Abbey, one of my favorites, and lauds SuckMansfield Park, the only of Austen's novels I actively dislike. 

It was just infuriating to me. I had to question if she'd ever actually read any of Austen's book, because this is the kind of dialogue, book, characters, and scenarios that Austen SNARKED IN HER OWN BOOKS. If you're going to write some kind of tribute novel, AT LEAST TRY, DAMMIT. 

Luckily, I've read other works by Shannon Hale and I know she's a good author, but it's like she got a prescription for stupid pills, popped them all, and birthed this monstrosity. 

I was so pissed off with this book that I literally felt my blood pressure rising as I was finishing it. If you were born with only half a brain, or you hate Austen, or you love really poor storytelling, go ahead and read this book. Everyone else, go read an actual Austen book. Or Sherlock Holmes, who would probably have injected cocaine, overdosed, gone on a crazy chemistry spree and poisoned every single person in this book, and then successfully framed Charles Augustus Milverton. Which would have been a really suitable alternate ending. 

ALL THE REACTION GIF's

While reading: 

Afterward:

 Summary of the book: 

Books I've Read Since The Night Circus

I've finished quite a few books in the last couple of weeks and wanted to do quick reviews of them. 

The Arrival, by Shaun Tan

This one was totally different from anything I usually read (or anything I've ever read, for that matter). For starters, it's a graphic novel, which usually isn't my thing. Secondly, there are no words. It's that artistic. Now, I realize that I should probably have been more serious and artsy about this book, but when there are no words, then my inner monologue takes over. And my inner monologue is really vulgar and tends to be kind of an idiot (also, it's British, don't even ask), so the reading went something like, "Okay, so this guy's going to buy postage stamps. Oh no wait, that's bread. And wait, there's a little ratf----r. What the eff even is that. What is it doing. It's like a shark-rat with gills. It's a ratf----r. Wait, everyone has a pet. That one's like a cat-fox. It's a cox." And on and on. 

This is actually a really moving story about a man who leaves his wife and child and home in a place that's being taken over by something bad (represented by a spiny dragon tail), and goes someplace new and foreign, tries to make a living over there, and later brings his wife and daughter to live there with him. It's an artistic story about immigration and emigration. He goes. The language is totally new and different (and so the reader experiences it with him, is completely made up and nonexistent). There are strange customs (everyone has some kind of pet, like in the Golden Compass books), strange ways to get food (I still don't get it...the best Inner Monologue and I came up with is that it's some kind of guessing game/vending machine in a wall), and everyone he meets has come from someplace else. It's like AMERICA but fictionalized. I liked it. I like that I was able to have a stupid narration in my head, but later realize what a cool story it is. And top of that, no matter where you're from or where you're going, you can "read" this book, because there's no words! I give major creativity props to Shaun Tan, and highly recommend it. I finished in about 20 minutes. You should at least go and look at the cute animal pictures. 

The Invention of Hugo Cabret, by Brian Selznick

Two things to note about my experience with this book: 

1. I have not seen the movie. 

2. I audiobooked it, and realized AFTERWARD that the actual book has some incredible illustrations that I totally missed by listening to the story, so I feel like I need to go back and actually read the physical book. 

That being said, I can't talk about the illustrations or the feel of the book, and I'm sorry about that. But the story itself was good. The boy, Hugo, works and lives in a train station in Paris. He's an orphan, and his uncle, the station's clock keeper, takes him in until he mysteriously disappears. Hugo continues to operate the station's clocks, because he doesn't want to go to an orphanage if anyone realized his uncle was dead. In the meantime, his deceased father had rescued an automaton (robot, or mechanical man) from a museum fire and was working to repair it. He died, and Hugo took over trying to fix it, certain that it held some kind of message for him about what to do in his life. 

It's a really interesting story in that it has some interesting factors: train stations, clock keeping, mechanics, magic tricks, early film, and Paris. I feel like the story wasn't as magical as I thought it was going to be, but maybe that's just me. It won the Caldecott and the movie is wildly popular, so maybe I'm just broken. But it seemed forgettable to me, if not for those few unforgettable aspects mentioned above. I do recommend it, but not to older readers. I'll keep it mind for the kids at the library, though. If you're an adult and you want to read a great kid's book, READ HARRY EFFING POTTER, ALREADY. 

The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, by Sherman Alexie

I'd heard a lot of buzz about this book on YA blogs, and I decided to give it a go myself. It's not usually something I'm into, Native American lit, but this book was actually really, really good. 

There are enough places for you to go read summaries of the story, so I won't summarize it, but it's a really great story about a Spokane boy who is desperate to escape the downward spiral of life on an Indian reservation, and he does this by going to the closest white school off the reservation (which is 22 miles away). It's touching, eye-opening, depressing, darkly comical, and illustrated with comics by the narrator which add a much needed note of levity to an otherwise heavy story. It reminds me a lot of The Perks of Being A Wallflower, but with a racial twist. If you like that kind of stuff, I definitely recommend it. I finished it in one sitting. I just couldn't stop. The narrator hooked me from page one, and I loved every second of it. It's an easy read, but one, I think, that'll stay with me. 

The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie, by Alan Bradley

THIS BOOK. OMG, THIS BOOK. This is the book I keep waiting for and it only comes every once in a great while. It's the book I was hoping that Godawful Sherlock Holmes thing would be. I was like:

It's the story of 11 year old Flavia de Luce, who aside from having a spectacular name, is a chemistry genius, prankster, and amateur sleuth. Although I use the word "amateur" loosely, because she's 11 and she basically solved every aspect of the mystery correctly. She, her father, and her two sisters live in a historic country manor home in England. Her mother is deceased. One morning, after a mysterious visitor calls on her father, Flavia finds aforementioned visitor dead on the grounds. She then cunningly pieces together the mystery of his death, using her brilliant knowledge of chemistry, her childhood naivety, and her bicycle called "Gladys" who I think she pretends is a horse. 

Flavia is a brilliant character. I can smell Sherlock Holmes on her, but she's different enough not to be a sad reincarnation. If Sherlock Holmes died and was reincarnated in the 1950's as a little girl, he might have come back as Flavia. Or if he'd fathered an illegitimate daughter with a dramatic actress (and don't even say Irene Adler or I will cut you). Or she could be a distant relative. She's calculating, chemical, and cunning like Holmes, but she has a flair for the dramatic and does, at times, show her emotions. She's just completely unique and I absolutely fell in love with her. 

I also loved the mystery. I GOT IT WRONG. I hate it when I'm reading a mystery, the red herring shows up, and like three chapters in I've solved it already. BORING. This one tricked me, and I love that! And Flavia didn't solve it by being like, "Look, a footprint, let me follow it." She conducted experiments, played on people's emotions, researched, etc. She's awesome. She's only eleven and she's fictional, but she's like my new role model. 

What I also love about this is that, because she's only a kid, she's an extremely unreliable narrator. Half the time I wasn't sure if her theories were childish and therefore, dismissible, or so crazy they just might be true. 

Loved, loved, LOVED this book. Luckily, there are three more in the series, with another two to come. CAN'T WAIT, omg, thank you so much Alan Bradley. I might even change my rule about not trusting people with two first names (or rather, people with a surname that could also be a first name) because you wrote this awesome character and story. Maybe. 

Absolutely recommend to Holmesians or people who love mysteries. 

The circus arrives without warning. No announcements precede it. It is simply there, when yesterday it was not.

This is probably the best book I've read this year (with the exception of The Graveyard Book, but that was a re-read). 

Everything about this book is absolutely magical, enrapturing, and basically perfect. From the cover, to the quotes at the beginning of sections, to the print on the page, it's consistent in its whimsical aesthetic the whole way through. 

How do I even begin to summarize?

I want to say its the story of two magicians who are pitted against each other in a game, wherein the circus is the playing field. But that's not really accurate. It's more like...instead of Vader vs. Luke, this story is like the Emperor vs. Obi-Wan. It's the story of two master magicians duking it out through their proteges. And the circus is the backdrop, and it is magnificent. 

The entire circus is black and white, with only pops of red throughout. It's very Tim Burton-esque, and I feel like the book should've had an accompanying soundtrack by Danny Elfman. There's your typical circus fare: a fortune teller (who can actually accurately read her tarot cards), a contortionist (who you're never quite sure is good or evil), acrobats...but then there's other things. A set of mysterious twins, one who sees the past, the other who sees the future. Men without shadows. A tent full of bottles, upon opening which reveal stories through appealing to the 5 senses. A tree that grants wishes. And no one within or involved with the circus ever ages or gets sick. 

And in the midst of it all is Celia, the illusionist, and Marco, assistant to the circus's proprietor. They've been bound together since children, trained meticulously (and in Celia's case, cruelly) in the ways of magic, and are pitted against each other in a game which spans decades. 

I'll be honest. I did not expect a happy ending to this book. But I was pleasantly surprised! And while I can't they necessarily lived happily ever after, they at least existed so. 

This book had everything in it: mystery, romance, some scary bits (but not what I'd call "horror"), and the beautiful, gothic, dreamlike scenescape the author so vividly painted. I absolutely, very highly recommend this book to male and female readers alike. You've got to try it! 

What the hell-ementary, my dear Watson?

I don't know why I keep torturing myself by reading Sherlock Holmes pastiches and hoping they'll be good. If there were kinks in the reading world (and I'm not saying there aren't, I'm just not into it...or aware of it, thankfully), I'd definitely be some kind of Sherlock Holmes masochist. 

No, but honestly, I just keep hoping I'll stumble upon a book that makes me feel like I'm reading some of Doily's Doyle's work. 

This was not that book.

So basically, this is some author's imagining of 13 year old Sherlock Holmes's first case. Which sounded cool, and it was a good premise (a slash-and-hack murder in Whitechapel, so of course I thought this was going to involve Jack the Ripper. Disappointingly, it didn't.), so I thought I'd give it a try.

Overall, it was a silly book. Crows literally solve the case. I'm not even joking. Like, the black birds. They SOLVE THE CASE. That's the kind of silliness that would've maybe come up in the original stories, but then Holmes would've explained it away and solved the mystery using, I don't know, CLUES, or EVIDENCE, or HIS BRAIN.

I felt like this Holmes was extremely out of character, which I guess you can get away with when it's the young, formative years of a someone. But with a character as iconic as Sherlock Holmes, I don't know...I've always felt that he was born Sherlock Holmes, and didn't grow into him. We hear, once or twice, in the original stories that he didn't have many friends in his school years, which I assumed was because he was a genius and was probably deducing the crap out of everyone, which was cool the first time but then just got annoying. In this book, he's all emotional (albeit, still friendless), and then it shows why he decides to shut off his emotions. Which I think is a little silly. 

Sherlock Holmes is also apparently Jewish, despite celebrating Christmas in "The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle." But I will give him this point as Holmes's religion is never expressly revealed (though he does make mention of his belief in prayer, morality, and a Creator in the original stories). 

We also have child-Irene Adler, which is extremely ridiculous to me, especially considering she was an AMERICAN and probably living in New Jersey at the time the story took place. 

Seriously, Mr. Peacock (terrible nom de plume, too)?? As a self-professed "Holmesian" did you ever actually READ any of the Holmes canon? 

I feel like there needs to be a society of people that are Sherlock Holmes experts who have to approve any knock-offs/pastiches before publication, because stuff like this just makes me mad. And if the author doesn't approve of the changes, then they have to delete x-amount of Holmes characteristics from their characters, give them a new name, and pretend none of this ever happened. 

"Pretend none of this ever happened," is, incidentally, what I'm doing now that I'm done reading this watery, disappointing, and highly forgetful book. 

The road goes ever on and on...

I decided this summer to read these books, because, CONFESSION: I never had. 

Well, that's not entirely true. 

I blitzed through Fellowship in my freshman year of high school and attempted to read The Hobbit in 5th grade, but I skipped all the boring singing and boring dwarves and just went straight to the "Riddles in the Dark" chapter, then skipped again until Smaug came up. So it doesn't really count.

Now that I have a degree in ENGLISH and LITERATURE, I thought I'd make use of it and attempt again. 

I was 12 when the Fellowship of the Ring movie came out, and it had a pretty profound effect on my middle school and early high school years. I LOVE the films (still do), so unfortunately, I had them color my view of book-version Middle Earth. 

That being said, this isn't really a book review, but more a comparison between the films and the books. 

What I have to do though is give credit to Peter Jackson for making all the worlds in these books feel so real. Tolkein is a brilliant writer, but he is, first and foremost, a scholar, professor, and philologist, and his books read a bit like textbooks at times. He's a storyteller second to all that. His story is brilliant, but I won't lie: there are parts in the books that are just dry. They're confusing, and the only way I got through them is because I had a visual in my mind from the movies, for which I have to thank Peter Jackson. He dissected the dry, boring bits and instead of going hog-wild with his imagination, tried to make it look and feel as real as Tolkein wrote it. Every city, particularly the Shire, Gondor and Rohan, has a deep history, its own language, its own people, and Jackson did a really good job conveying that on film in a way that was a little dull to read about for eight pages at a time. Like, Helm's Deep for example. It's described in such an odd way in the books, but in the movies, you know exactly what it is and what it looks like, so it was helpful for me to have that image when I was trying to form a picture based off Tolkein's words. 

That's the other thing about Tolkein. He writes for pages about things, but overall, he's not very descriptive. Take, for instance, the problem of Gollum's appearance. In The Hobbit, Tolkein aptly describes his lamp-like eyes, his hissing voice, his creeptacular crawling...but completely omits any information about his size! So illustrators made him HUGE (see various illustrations here). And there's a lot of passages like that. Tolkein gets very caught up in the history, names, and languages, but fails to describe simple details that help the reader IMAGINE the world as they're reading. 

So thank you, Peter Jackson, for taking the time to make this all feel genuine and in keeping with the books. Because for all the criticisms the films receive from die-hard book fans, he really did a very good job keeping a very "Tolkein-esque" feel to the films and characters. 

Also, I feel the casting was pretty near flawless...EXCEPT FOR FRODO! In the books, Frodo is like, 50 years old. Which is still pretty young for a hobbit, but did they really have to cast 19 year old Elijah Wood??? I mean, he's got very sad eyes and was really good at showing Frodo's struggle and decline as the ring takes more and more hold over him (he was also good at lying on the ground for approximately 85% of the films). But he's just so young! I had a hard time rectifying my imagining of book-Frodo with movie-Frodo. Other than that, the cast was pretty darn flawless (especially Saruman, Gandalf, Pippin, Galadriel, and Boromir). 

Things They Left Out of the Movie:

-Tom Bombadil, the Barrow Wights, and all that: it was a nice part of the story, but it really serves no purpose in furthering the plot. Nothing happens there that really shapes the characters in any significant way, and he never reappears later in the story. I'm actually glad they didn't leave it in the films simply because it would've taken up more film space and again, it didn't really serve any purpose, except to show that Bombadil is essentially everything that Sauron is not. If Gandalf is the foil to Saruman, Tom Bombadil is the essence of peace in the world before Sauron and the ring(s). 

-Sam and Frodo's relationship: no, I don't mean GAY subtext. I mean, in the books, Sam is definitely Frodo's servant. In the movies, you get the sense that they're kind of like BFF's, but Sam is most definitely employed (albeit lovingly) by the Bagginses and their relationship is absolutely that of master-servant. He calls Frodo "master" throughout like, the entire series. I am ambivalent in this regard. I liked them as besties in the movies, and their relationship worked really well in the books, too. I dislike the film one only because it feels like they censored that out to make it more P.C.

-All of the freaking singing: seriously. So. Much. SINGING. This is why I couldn't get through The Two Towers in high school. I was like, "Legolas, SHUT YOUR FACE." I like it in the books because it makes it seem even more legendary and lore-like. Thank God they didn't film all of this singing, though. It would've been very silly. 

-Shelob happens in the Two Towers: I was totally unprepared for that, thinking that because I'd seen the movies, I knew how it was going to go. HOW FOOLISH I WAS. And Tolkein literally ends that book on SUCH a cliff-hanger. It's like, "Frodo got taken into Mordor, Sam thought he was dead and was totally depressed, but little did he know Frodo was actually alive. The end!" That bugger. 

-Saruman's canon death: in the books, he's killed within the last 20 pages of Return of the King, in the Shire, by Grima Wormtongue (who is then slain by angry hobbits). I don't even remember what happens to him in the movies, but I know that WASN'T it. 

-Prince Imrahil: Faramir's uncle and kind of a badass, who was completely left out of the films. Read about him here.

-Faramir and Eowyn's love story: which could have been its own story it's so epic. It was very Arthurian in nature and takes place while they're both healing from battle wounds in Gondor. I really wish they'd shown it. I wish they'd made a whole separate movie of it. Dang! 

-The Scouring of the Shire: we see about 3 seconds of this in Galadriel's mirror, but it's actually a pretty major part of the book. There's a whole other battle that goes on in the Shire, and while I was heartbroken at first, I like this part, because it shows how far-reaching Sauron's evil influence was, and how incredibly hearty and awesome the hobbits are as a race. 

Things They Added to the Movie:

-Everything about Arwen: I love movie Arwen. I love Liv Tyler and I won't even pretend that Arwen wasn't my main sartorial inspiration for like 2 years after the movie came out. But omg, she literally says ONE THING in the entire trilogy of books! She is not this awesome, badass, water-horse-summoning Elf woman. Nah. She's pretty. And she sits quietly next to Elrond and her brothers (also not in the film) and makes sad eyes at Aragorn. And that's about it, until she marries him in Return of the King where she utters like, one line to Frodo. SO DISAPPOINTING. That being said, Eowyn was the progressive, strong female character I wanted to see in Arwen. But I won't complain because at least there was ONE in there, which is pretty good considering this was written during WWII. 

-Epic maneuvers in the Mines of Moria: this scene takes up a good chunk of the movie, presumably to give a big build up to Gandalf's "death." In the book, it was like, 4 pages. The Council of Elrond was about two and a half chapters, for comparison.

-That whole scene with the Wargs when Aragorn somehow ends up in a river, and then ultimately ends up back at Helm's Deep: this literally did not happen even a little bit.

-Elves at Helm's Deep: also didn't happen. And I liked it better that way, because that was a battle for men to win, and to show the desolation of the situation. There was no aid from anyone. They were on their own against scores of orcs and Uruk-hai. It was scary, and they were, to quote the Avengers, "hilariously outgunned." 

-Legolas shield-surfing: needless to say, Tolkein didn't write this, either. 

-Most of the stuff that happens with Faramir, Frodo, and Sam: Ringwraiths don't attack the city. There is no scene where they escape through the sewers. It's all pretty subdued in the books, actually. But they do a great job describing Faramir, and I do really like his character (and I like how well David Wenham played him). 

Pretty much everything else was spot-on. Also, can I say how glad I am we waited until we had proper Gollum technology? Because he's SO CREEPY in both the films and the books, and I still do not have any sympathy for him and will probably always pee my pants a little whenever he shows up. 

Guys, I could write like, a book on my thoughts on Lord of the Rings. It's just SO GOOD. If you've never read it, please give it a try. I ended up listening to portions of it on audio, just to help me get through it, but it's so worth it. This is the ultimate piece of fantasy literature (and a lot of parallels exist between this and Harry Potter, just saying), and if you enjoy the genre or the movies at all, PLEASE at least try to read them. They're incredible. I laughed out loud, I was in suspense (even though I'd seen the movies, and THAT is good storytelling right there), I cried when it was over...I'm totally sad they're over. I'm having a major book hangover. 

Also this accurately sums up my life right now: 

So amazing. 

Ála tira acca haiya! Mal si a vanya as márë órelyar! Namárië, ar nai aistalë Eldar ar Atani ar ilyë Léralieron hilya le! Eleni sílar antalyannar!

"I am half-sick of shadows," said the Lady of Shalott.

So, I'm obsessed with Elaine of Ascolat, aka: the Lady of Shalott. 

I don't know...I just love the whole story (it's tragic, romantic, and involves water. These usually indicate I'll love it), and especially Tennyson's poem (it's probably my favorite poem, if I had to pick one). 

Naturally, I had to read this book once I discovered it. 

It's a more "historical" take on Elaine's story. Which is stupid, because it honestly reminded me of the King Arthur movie (y'know, the one where they photo shopped suddenly-a-Pict-Guinevere, aka: Keira Knightley's boobs so it looked like she had some?). You know what else is stupid? The cover. This literally has NOTHING to do with the book. At all. There was no ivy. Elaine is never mentioned with ivy in her hair EVER. I mean, show us a lake, a spindle, a mirror...ANYTHING. This is probably the worst cover art I've encountered in a while, but luckily, the whole "judging books by their covers" and how we shouldn't do it thing is true in this case. 

Anyway, the whole book is written in a lyrical, almost poetic style except it doesn't rhyme. It's basically a free verse book.This moves it along really quickly. I finished well over 100 pages in less than an hour. The language wavers between "trying too hard" and "wow, that's actually workable." But I generally really loved the re-telling of Elaine's tale, and how the author wove in classical elements (like the boat, the spindle, the mirror, etc.) into the story but gave it a more realistic edge. She isn't locked up in a tower with a curse. She's part of Arthur's camp during the Saxon wars. She fights when she's not supposed to, is friends with Morgan and Guinevere, and is generally pretty cool. 

But she's not a Mary Sue. She's more like Katniss. You don't totally love or believe her, but she's better than most stock "femme fatale" characters. 

I mostly loved the book because of the aforementioned incorporation of classic elements from Elaine's story. And it's King Arthur. And there are Picts and battles and Merlin, so it's pretty awesome.

Overall, if you can get past the horribly generic cover art, it's worth a read, especially if you're into Arthurian legend or girls who like to ride/die in boats. 

SPOILER ALERT: she doesn't die in this book. But she comes close. 

"She doesn't get eaten by the eels at this time."

Another spoiler alert: apparently everyone underestimated Tristan's ability to get over Isolde. 

What. 

Anyway, it was good. Check it out if it sounds interesting. 

Also, THIS BITCH:

I might be becoming dangerously addicted to Candy Crush. Just so you all know.

I just finished reading The Secret Life of Bees by Sue Monk Kidd, and I have to say, it was an astoundingly good novel.

It's not usually a genre I favor, but I'm really enjoying the miniature foray I've taken into Southern chick lit recently. Maybe it's because I'm a g.r.i.t.s. myself, or because the South just has such a unique flavor, but I really enjoyed this book, along with the ones I've read by Sarah Addison Allen and Rebecca Wells. 

The Secret Life of Bees is about Lily, a 14 year old girl who lives with her abusive father in the wake of having accidentally shot her mother as a 4 year old. I'm not even kidding.

A lot of things happen, but she and her black maid run away from her father and end up in a pepto bismol pink house of 3 black beekeepers, who sell their "Black Madonna" honey (so called because they label it with a picture of a black Virgin Mary). 

Did I mention that the year is 1964 and the Civil Rights Law had just been passed?

While the overarching theme of this book is, of course, black rights and the controversy of a white girl living with four black women, I would say it's only part of the novel. The real story is Lily coming to peace with her past and her struggle to find out what she can about her mother. The truth isn't pretty, and the end of the novel is hard to swallow. You really feel Lily's pain as she makes unsavory discoveries about her mother's past (and therefore, her own). Or at least I did. But in a touching turn, Lilly ends up with many amazingly loving mothers--who are just as colorblind towards her as she is to them. 

It's a really moving story, and I loved it. I also liked the Marian mysticism of the story. The black women aren't exactly Catholic. They invent their own religion based around the Virgin Mary (there are a few scenes that are downright blasphemous, but it's played off in a lighthearted way, and they ultimately reveal that they know Jesus is "the main guy."), and of course, the honey they sell is called Black Madonna Honey. But it's neat because Lilly, formerly completely un-religious, comes to adopt Mary as yet another surrogate mother, and I think that's what she's really there for--to be a mother to the motherless, or when we have a hard time accepting our earthly mothers. So I liked that spin on religion in the book, too.

What really makes this book are the characters. Every single one is so deep, you feel like you're reading a biography. Even the minor characters, even Lily's dead mother, have such a fullness to them that you can't help but think they're real. The main ones, though--Lily, Rosaleen, August, May, and June--are so realistic that you wish so badly you could go and talk to them when the story's over. 

Overall, it's so good. I definitely recommend it. Not sure if my gentlemen readers would appreciate it as much as my lady readers, but if you want something along the lines of The Help, you must check it out.


Just SOME of my favorite quotes:

“There is nothing perfect...only life.” 

"I realized it for the first time in my life: there is nothing but mystery in the world, how it hides behind the fabric of our poor, browbeat days, shining brightly, and we don't even know it.” 

“Actually, you can be bad at something...but if you love doing it, that will be enough."

“People who think dying is the is the worst thing don't know a thing about life.” 

"People, in general, would rather die than forgive. It's that hard. If God said in plain language, "I'm giving you a choice, forgive or die," a lot of people would go ahead and order their coffin.” 

“Everybody needs a seashell in her bathroom to remind her the ocean is her home.” 

“There's a fullness of time for things, Lily. You have to know when to prod and when to be quiet, when to let things take their course.” 

" ...when it's time to die, go ahead and die, and when it's time to live, live. Don't sort-of-maybe live, but live like you're going all out, like you're not afraid.” 

Note: The movie version of this was okay. The casting, apart from Queen Latifah and Sophie Okonedo, was terrible, but they did a pretty good job in keeping parts of the script verbatim from the book. 

Library and Lestat.

My new job is AMAZING! 

I feel like this. 

The people are so sweet (I'm the youngest...again. I guess I shouldn't be bothered, because you're never as young as you are right now), I'm surrounded by books, I got to help move/relocate the children's section so I got very familiar with the layout of things, there are MANATEE coloring sheets and posters (haven't used either yet, but that's coming...whether they know it or not), and the kids get so into story time that it's just amusing to be there and see their reactions. 

And then, as if being surrounded by books wasn't convincing enough to me that I "belonged" there, my co-workers asked two questions that solidified this in my mind:

1. How many animals do you have and what kind of tea do you like?

2. Do you watch much TV? If not, that's okay, as long as you've seen the essential films: Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and The Princess Bride. 

AWESOME!

It's just a much better fit. There are things I miss about my old job, of course, but this just feels really right. 

I'm actually kind of excited. 

On that note, I wanted to do a book review on Interview with the Vampire by Anne Rice. 

This is one of those books that I've been meaning to read FOREVER and my aversion to blood and gore kept me from doing so. But then I was like, "I really want to read Dracula again, but I want to read it for the first time (did you know that if you read a book 6 times you can guess the ending??)." So I decided not to read Dracula again, and instead read what society has deemed a paragon of vampire fiction (but real vampires. Not the Cullens, amusing as they are). 

I actually really liked this book, and apart from one scene in particular (which I can't explain without major spoilers), it was not as gory as I had anticipated. Rice has that JK Rowling-esque quality of sucking (no pun intended) you into the story within the first couple of pages to the point that you don't want to put the book down. 

It's basically a story that takes place in the present day, when a young writer sets up an interview with Louis, the vampire, to write about his life story. He's skeptical at first, but Louis's life story is so flooded with detail (and various displays of vampirism) that he ends up believing...and rightly so. Louis's whole life is pretty tragic, but he finally reaches the point of death by depression, and this is when the vampire Lestat comes in and turns him into a vampire. Lestat basically wants Louis's plantation, and that's why he did it, but it ends up working out well for Louis as well, who didn't want any business living. Louis is a very sensitive, pensive, and melancholy vampire who spends a lot of time pondering if there's a God or not, and how he fits into that whole scheme. Also, he lives on rats. Ultimately, the slave workers on the plantation realize what's going on, so instead of going away quietly in the night, Louis burns his plantation. Still not sure why. At this time, Lestat turns a child into a vampire, Claudia, and he and Louis become her "parents." Obviously, this is problematic, because about 60 years in, Claudia realizes she'll never grow up physically even though she's mentally matured. 

Anne Rice is very ambiguous about the nature of Louis and Claudia's relationship, btw, but I tend to call shenanigans on that one. 

Without spoiling the story, Claudia and Louis leave Lestat for Europe where they hope to find more vampires (they also commit some more arson, because why not?). They do, in Paris. This part is creepy and it actually totally sucks plot-wise because I don't like the characters and I can't say why not without spoiling the ending of the story. But Louis and Claudia should have just stayed in America. They could've gone to the Pacific Northwest and taken up with a clan of sparkling vegetarian vampires....

...oh wait. 

Anyway, it was a really good vampire book, and I absolutely recommend it if you like that kind of thing. Nowhere near as good as Dracula, and totally different, but I'm glad I read it. 

Btw, if you're curious, you can read my Dracula synopses here: http://seaofsnark.blogspot.com/2011/11/dracula-part-i-when-in-transylvania.html

Beautiful book haul!

If you couldn't tell by now, I love books (seriously, if you didn't know that, GET OUT). More than almost anything, except possibly animals. Almost certainly more than I love most people ("most" being the key word). 

Well, as every book lover knows, the quote by Erasmus is 100 million percent accurate: “When I have a little money, I buy books; and if I have any left, I buy food and clothes.”

I was browsing Etsy for some pretty, antique books to add to my collection (old books excite me more than they should), and I stumbled upon a couple of treasures from BittyBJoy. I tracked their shipping feverishly, but it was so expedient I only had to wait 3 DAYS! 

You can imagine my excitement when I came home to a package this afternoon. But then I opened it, and my elation was boundless. 

They came wrapped in these beautiful vintage handkerchiefs, with cheery orange ribbon! So pretty, and such a lovely surprise! Now I own HANKIES in addition to beautiful books!

The books I ordered were Essays of Elia and Last Essays by Charles Lamb, and Under the Sign of Jupiter by Susan Sontag. 

The one I was really excited about was the Charles Lamb book, which I'll admit I've wanted to read since I read about it in my beloved The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society. I ordered the other one, honestly, because I liked the cover art (I feel a bit shallow admitting this, but I REGRET NOTHING).

It's so pretty! I love the vintage cover art. It's an ex-library book, so I love that it's been held in so many hands before mine. It has all the quaint library stamps, too. And it's small enough that it can easily be toted around with me for when I get bored, or stuck in a line, etc!

Love, love, LOVE this book! So excited to add it to my collection!

And can we all just take a minute to examine the purely freaking majestic artwork of this book?

Not only is it royal purple, but it's a gentleman who appears to be observing a giant pocketwatch (or time itself?) slip into the ocean...all beneath the watch of SATURN. It's a book of essays on film criticism, which I'm afraid is a topic I know very little about, but I'm going to attempt to read it. If the inside does nothing for me, I'll either keep it just to look at or pass it along to someone who'd appreciate the content and not just the cover. 

I just had  to share my treasures with you. If you're into pretty, unique, or antique books, check  BittyBJoy out! It's an awesome and delightful shop, and it was such a pleasure to do business with them. 

Book Review: The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society

I promised you (like, two lifetimes ago) a book review on this book. First of all, can we just talk about how delightfully eccentric this title is? It's up there with Ella Minnow Pea. The title is important. I always envy people who can title things well, because it's one of my weakest points in writing. Such perfection! 

The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society focuses on young writer, Juliet Ashton, as she exits her post as a satirical WWII columnist and attempts, along with European society at large, to move on with her life post-war. One day, Juliet receives a letter from Guernsey resident (and member of the Literary Society) Dawsey Adams, a man who has come into possession of a book that used to belong to her via used bookstore. He found her name and address in the booksleeve and decided to write to her to discuss the book. Thus began Juliet's correspondence with the island of Guernsey. The book is entirely epistolary (which I love! Dracula anyone?) and focuses on Juliet's letters to and from the residents of Guernsey as she tries, unhappily, to continue her life as an author in London. Her friendship blossoms and deepens with the members of the Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society until she feels that she has to go visit them. Her time on the island changes her life forever, and gives her the long sought-after topic of her next book. 

This book is so...divine. I haven't enjoyed a book as much as I enjoyed this one in a LONG time. It's all about people who love books. There's something so intrinsically important about the written word, and the printed word, and this book captures that love. The characters are engrossing. I couldn't stop thinking about them! I found myself wishing they were real, and that I could take a boat to Guernsey and join them in their book discussions and general shenanigans. The story is constructed beautifully, too. There's not a single bit that's in there that shouldn't be, and meaning would be lost if anything was removed. Every word is perfectly placed, like pieces of a puzzle, and they come together to form something absolutely breathtaking. Though it deals with gritty topics like Nazi occupation and concentration camps, it maintains a loving, pleasant feel about it.

I wanted to share a couple of quotes. How could I not? 

“That's what I love about reading: one tiny thing will interest you in a book, and that tiny thing will lead you to another book, and another bit there will lead you onto a third book. It's geometrically progressive - all with no end in sight, and for no other reason than sheer enjoyment.” 

“Men are more interesting in books than they are in real life.”  

“I love seeing the bookshops and meeting the booksellers-- booksellers really are a special breed. No one in their right mind would take up clerking in a bookstore for the salary, and no one in his right mind would want to own one-- the margin of profit is too small. So, it has to be a love of readers and reading that makes them do it-- along with first dibs on the new books.” 

“Thinking to comfort me, they said, "Life goes on." What nonsense, I thought, of course it doesn't. It's death that goes on; Ian is dead now and will be dead tomorrow and the next year and forever. There is no end to that, but perhaps there will be an end to the sorrow of it.” 

“I don't want to be married just to be married. I can't think of anything lonelier than spending the rest of my life with someone I can't talk to, or worse, someone I can't be silent with.”  

“After all, what's good enough for Austen ought to be good enough for anyone.”  

Gosh, I could quote the whole book here. Any book with quotes like that has to be worth reading, right? This is one of those books whose spine will be creased, and the pages well-worn with re-readings. I cannot recommend it highly enough. To everyone. ALL THE TIME.

In short: I laughed, I cried. It was perfect.