So, if you haven't noticed, I haven't blogged in a while.
Umm ... sorry. It's not that our loyal readers aren't important (Hi mom!), but I have been busy. First, I went on vacation. Then I came home and I've been taking an online class and my husband and I want to eat food every day and, dontcha know, the house doesn't clean itself. And then all the fall TV shows came back into my life and I was distracted by the pretty glowing box with the moving pictures ... and it didn't help that my mean ol' sister got me into four, count 'em, four new TV shows ("Chopped," "Top Chef: Just Desserts," "The Big Bang Theory" and "How I Met Your Mother"). THANKS A LOT, KELLY!
So, now I am finally started to feel like I might be able to carve out a few minutes for blogging (thanks to the fact that "Project Runway" is over, mainly - Mondo was robbed, by the way!) ... but Monday starts National Novel Writing Month. Which means, almost all of my writing skillz will go toward trying to write a 50,000-word novel during the month of November. I have tried this feat and failed several times, but not this year. Oh no. This year I am in a good position. I don't write much for my job anymore, so I will not have writing burn-out. I work an opposite shift from my husband so I won't feel like I'm neglecting him by writing a novel instead of snuggling on the couch with him, playing Halo and Left 4 Dead. And I already told my husband that he has to do all the housework, cooking and grocery shopping during the month of November, since if I finish my totally rockin' novel and sell it and become a millionaire novelist like J.K. Rowling, he will reap the benefits too.
So ... how to keep my Book Tarts blogging up to a level that Kelly won't kick my ass when she comes back for Christmas? Why ... I'll blog about my NaNoWriMo experience! Plus, all of my adoring fans (Hi Mom! Hi Facebook friends who scan my blog entries out of pity!) can keep me on the right path, offering encouragement and threatening to make fun of me mercilessly if I fail. Because, if nothing else, I know Kelly will make fun of me, because that's what sisters do. Mercilessly taunt each other. YAY SISTERLY LOVE!
So, that's what you can expect from me for the next month, because I'm guessing I'm not going to get much reading done.
NaNoWriMo ... here I come!
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Buying Books
*I had a brilliantly awesome idea for a blog yesterday...and then I forgot it. So I am posting something I wrote awhile ago*
I'm a librarian. I also enjoy being a library patron. I love to just browse around a library and see what they have, see what strikes me. I enjoy checking out books that I've never heard of, books I've read before, books people have recommended to me, books by authors that I already love. However, I also have a terrible addiction...buying books.
This addiction, it is something that I can't stop. I love book sales, used book stores, regular book stores...anywhere I can buy books. I have certain authors that I will buy any of their books I can find. I have a ton of Stephen King books that I've purchased at book sales and used book stores that I've never read. I have every Meg Cabot book I can find. I own quite a few Michael Crichton books, even though I've only ever read one of his books. I have bought books that I read and enjoyed and then have never reread the books. I just really like owning books.
Now, I don't go all out all the time. If I can get the book at a used book store or a book sale, I do that. I love searching through and finding a book for $.50 that I know I will eventually feel like reading. However, if I really want a book and can't find it for cheap, I'll just go buy it new. I try to get cheaper books. If I can get the book for $8 instead of $13, I will be happy. I went to Borders last night and bought four new books. Two I have read before and two I haven't read. I found five more books that I wanted to buy, but decided not to spend the extra $60 to get them...I do have some self-control.
I am not that crazed about buying tv shows or movies. I mean, sure, I have a ton of dvds. But they were all purchased after some thought (or because they were like $5 and therefore worth an impulse purchase). I don't randomly go to the store to just browse through the dvds and see what strikes me, but I will go to a bookstore and browse just to see what I may want to grab.
Addiction. But I feel like it is a good addiction. It is an intellectual addiction. It is an addiction that can benefit other people, as I enjoy letting people borrow my books. My sister, mom, and I are always sending books back and forth to each other...I currently have some of the Sookie Stackhouse books from my mom, not to mention a ton of Cat Who books and the Nancy Martin books. My sister has my copy of Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman right now.
I think part of my addiction comes from liking to have a complete series of books. It is driving me crazy right now that I don't have all of the Louise Rennison books. Of the series of ten books, I have numbers 1-4, 7, 8, & 10. Gah! Also, my mom sent me the first two Nancy Martin books, which I read and loved. She also then gave me numbers 6 & 7. I had to go out and buy the missing books so that we would have a full collection.
As far of addictions go, I'd say that a book buying addiction is pretty fabulous. And it doesn't really get in the way of checking things out from the library, as I still do that a bunch. And there are books that I want to read, but have no desire to own. Selective addiction, I have.
I'm a librarian. I also enjoy being a library patron. I love to just browse around a library and see what they have, see what strikes me. I enjoy checking out books that I've never heard of, books I've read before, books people have recommended to me, books by authors that I already love. However, I also have a terrible addiction...buying books.
This addiction, it is something that I can't stop. I love book sales, used book stores, regular book stores...anywhere I can buy books. I have certain authors that I will buy any of their books I can find. I have a ton of Stephen King books that I've purchased at book sales and used book stores that I've never read. I have every Meg Cabot book I can find. I own quite a few Michael Crichton books, even though I've only ever read one of his books. I have bought books that I read and enjoyed and then have never reread the books. I just really like owning books.
Now, I don't go all out all the time. If I can get the book at a used book store or a book sale, I do that. I love searching through and finding a book for $.50 that I know I will eventually feel like reading. However, if I really want a book and can't find it for cheap, I'll just go buy it new. I try to get cheaper books. If I can get the book for $8 instead of $13, I will be happy. I went to Borders last night and bought four new books. Two I have read before and two I haven't read. I found five more books that I wanted to buy, but decided not to spend the extra $60 to get them...I do have some self-control.
I am not that crazed about buying tv shows or movies. I mean, sure, I have a ton of dvds. But they were all purchased after some thought (or because they were like $5 and therefore worth an impulse purchase). I don't randomly go to the store to just browse through the dvds and see what strikes me, but I will go to a bookstore and browse just to see what I may want to grab.
Addiction. But I feel like it is a good addiction. It is an intellectual addiction. It is an addiction that can benefit other people, as I enjoy letting people borrow my books. My sister, mom, and I are always sending books back and forth to each other...I currently have some of the Sookie Stackhouse books from my mom, not to mention a ton of Cat Who books and the Nancy Martin books. My sister has my copy of Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman right now.
I think part of my addiction comes from liking to have a complete series of books. It is driving me crazy right now that I don't have all of the Louise Rennison books. Of the series of ten books, I have numbers 1-4, 7, 8, & 10. Gah! Also, my mom sent me the first two Nancy Martin books, which I read and loved. She also then gave me numbers 6 & 7. I had to go out and buy the missing books so that we would have a full collection.
As far of addictions go, I'd say that a book buying addiction is pretty fabulous. And it doesn't really get in the way of checking things out from the library, as I still do that a bunch. And there are books that I want to read, but have no desire to own. Selective addiction, I have.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
My Literary Week in Review
I have been reading more as of late, and reading things that have happy endings instead of the dystopic depressing stuff I had been choosing recently. It is always nice to offset thought-inducing dystopic views with a murder mystery and a romance novel. And that is exactly what I have done as of late. Which brings me to...
If you like romance novels or time travely fantasy and are not opposed to sex scenes, I highly recommend Karen Marie Moning's Highlander series. A while back I read Kiss of the Highlander, the fourth book in the series. It worked very well as a stand alone, as do most of the early books in the series. But now I am reading the Highlander books from the beginning. I just finished Beyond the Highland Mist. It was quite good, though I found myself frustrated with the characters because they were both too stubborn to discuss their real feelings. Gah! But then again, that is part of what made the book super steamy. As the reader, you know what they are both feeling, but they don't know what each other is feeling. Frustrating...but fun! I loved, Adrienne, the heroine of the story. Even though I wanted her to admit her feelings, I kinda dug how much she stuck to her guns and refused to be seduced. I like strong, sassy female characters in romance novels. I found the main man, Hawk, likable, if not exactly someone I would find myself going for were I the heroine. I just really enjoy Moning's writing style, fantasy elements, and humor mixed with the dramatic.
I also read another Blackbird Sister Mystery. I always really enjoy Nancy Martin's books, though I felt slightly not invested in this one, Have Your Cake and Kill Him Too. I love all three Blackbird sisters, despite, or perhaps because of, their unique brand of crazy. I just felt like the book didn't really amp up until toward the end, which once I got within a few chapters from the end I had to finish it despite it being midnight when I had to get up at 6am. Also, there was not a very satisfying relationship aspect to this one. And parts of it felt a bit forced. And my favorite character wasn't in it at all! I still enjoyed it and will read the next one, which will hopefully be back on track.
Another read from this week was Two Blonds, a Sookie Stackhouse short story by Charlaine Harris. I read it all in one sitting, which isn't that impressive since it was a short story. But still. It was super cute. It was nice to have a little bite (haha! clever pun) of the Sookie-verse while waiting for the next book to come out, which is apparently going to be a Sookie Stackhouse companion with a short story, but not a novel! Gah! Need new book! Must find out what happens next! Anyway...Two Blonds was really cute. It was just Sookie and Pam, which is always fun. I love Pam and am glad anytime she and Sookie are together because they are really funny. It was also nice to get back into the book universe as I have just finished watching season three of True Blood. I like both universes, but am terribly partial to the books.
Now, the big question is...what to read next? I am going on vacation starting tomorrow afternoon and need a book for the plane and in the afternoons I will spend sitting by the pool in the hot Florida sun. I had kinda been planning on reading The Historian, but feel like that isn't really a vacation book. I might read the next Blackbird Sister book, but what if I find that I am not crazy about it while on vacation. I need something guaranteed to be good. I recently got a couple Jennifer Crusie books and a book by Sophie Kinsella, so I can always read chick lit. That seems vacationy, right? The Cat Who... books are always good for vacation, but I would have to take quite a few since the read really fast. Oh, the decisions I need to make before tonight. The one nice thing is that I am vacationing with my parents, so I can always trade books with my mom if I finish mine.
If you like romance novels or time travely fantasy and are not opposed to sex scenes, I highly recommend Karen Marie Moning's Highlander series. A while back I read Kiss of the Highlander, the fourth book in the series. It worked very well as a stand alone, as do most of the early books in the series. But now I am reading the Highlander books from the beginning. I just finished Beyond the Highland Mist. It was quite good, though I found myself frustrated with the characters because they were both too stubborn to discuss their real feelings. Gah! But then again, that is part of what made the book super steamy. As the reader, you know what they are both feeling, but they don't know what each other is feeling. Frustrating...but fun! I loved, Adrienne, the heroine of the story. Even though I wanted her to admit her feelings, I kinda dug how much she stuck to her guns and refused to be seduced. I like strong, sassy female characters in romance novels. I found the main man, Hawk, likable, if not exactly someone I would find myself going for were I the heroine. I just really enjoy Moning's writing style, fantasy elements, and humor mixed with the dramatic.
I also read another Blackbird Sister Mystery. I always really enjoy Nancy Martin's books, though I felt slightly not invested in this one, Have Your Cake and Kill Him Too. I love all three Blackbird sisters, despite, or perhaps because of, their unique brand of crazy. I just felt like the book didn't really amp up until toward the end, which once I got within a few chapters from the end I had to finish it despite it being midnight when I had to get up at 6am. Also, there was not a very satisfying relationship aspect to this one. And parts of it felt a bit forced. And my favorite character wasn't in it at all! I still enjoyed it and will read the next one, which will hopefully be back on track.
Another read from this week was Two Blonds, a Sookie Stackhouse short story by Charlaine Harris. I read it all in one sitting, which isn't that impressive since it was a short story. But still. It was super cute. It was nice to have a little bite (haha! clever pun) of the Sookie-verse while waiting for the next book to come out, which is apparently going to be a Sookie Stackhouse companion with a short story, but not a novel! Gah! Need new book! Must find out what happens next! Anyway...Two Blonds was really cute. It was just Sookie and Pam, which is always fun. I love Pam and am glad anytime she and Sookie are together because they are really funny. It was also nice to get back into the book universe as I have just finished watching season three of True Blood. I like both universes, but am terribly partial to the books.
Now, the big question is...what to read next? I am going on vacation starting tomorrow afternoon and need a book for the plane and in the afternoons I will spend sitting by the pool in the hot Florida sun. I had kinda been planning on reading The Historian, but feel like that isn't really a vacation book. I might read the next Blackbird Sister book, but what if I find that I am not crazy about it while on vacation. I need something guaranteed to be good. I recently got a couple Jennifer Crusie books and a book by Sophie Kinsella, so I can always read chick lit. That seems vacationy, right? The Cat Who... books are always good for vacation, but I would have to take quite a few since the read really fast. Oh, the decisions I need to make before tonight. The one nice thing is that I am vacationing with my parents, so I can always trade books with my mom if I finish mine.
ZOMG! Must Read Book of the Century!
Jessa Crispin, the founder of bookslut.com, wrote an article a while back that I found myself in full agreement with. http://www.thesmartset.com/article/article09221001.aspx. If you don't feel like reading the whole article, it is about not reading Freedom by Jonathan Franzen. I have heard a ton about Franzen's latest book. Tons. Way more than I cared to hear. It sparked a debate about Chick Lit. About female writers in general. About book critics. About if a book written in 2010 can be considered "the book of the century". Drama drama drama. I was never planning on reading Freedom. Now that it is in Oprah's book club, I am definitely not reading it. It is nice that I am not the only person who was, is, and shall continue to be ignoring it.
However, this post is not about reading or not reading Franzen. It is about the second part of Crispin's article, the part about must read books. You always hear that there are certain books everyone should read. You have to read Tolkien, Harry Potter, Jane Austen, Tolstoy, Franzen, Twilight, Hunger Games, Hemingway, Mark Twain, etc., etc., etc. I am in agreement with Crispin that there is no such thing as a must read. Why must I read Jane Austen? Who is to say that I will enjoy Pride and Prejudice? Or that I will relate to it at all? Or that I even care? Do I really need to read Hemingway? Really? Who says?
Who decides what books are must reads? I think what you should read depends on what you enjoy. If you are a fan of horror/thriller/mysteries you should probably read Stephen King. But then again, maybe you don't want to and you would rather read Dean Koontz. For me, Stephen King is a must read, but that just means that I must read him, not that you must read him. People are constantly telling others what they should read. It is the whole point of Oprah's Book Club. Here are the books you should read. I've read two books off of the entire list since the book club started and they were both for classes. I don't like reading a book just because it is popular or lots of people read it. You know why? Because I am not lots of people. I have certain tastes that do not necessarily coincide with other peoples' tastes. I enjoy fantasy, romance, mystery, and action. I especially like when they are combined. I love chick lit that has some fantasy and mystery in it, but still has a fight scene. I have a friend who loves fantasy and romance, but doesn't like the action stuff as much, so we have different must read books.
One other reason that I dislike any sort of "must read" "book of the century" "book club" book is that I really don't like people telling me what to do. If you suggest that I may enjoy a book because you know me and know what I like to read, I will probably take your suggestion. If you arbitrarily mandate that everyone must read this book, I will totally avoid that book, even if I may have been planning on reading it anyway. As my sister says, I am contrary.
Next time someone tells you about that Must Read book, go ahead and read it if it sounds like it is something you would enjoy, but don't read it just because someone said to. If you read it due to duty instead of enjoyment you will end up hating it. Just ask any student ever. The majority of books that students are forced to read, they hate. Read things you enjoy and everything else can be read by some other people.
However, this post is not about reading or not reading Franzen. It is about the second part of Crispin's article, the part about must read books. You always hear that there are certain books everyone should read. You have to read Tolkien, Harry Potter, Jane Austen, Tolstoy, Franzen, Twilight, Hunger Games, Hemingway, Mark Twain, etc., etc., etc. I am in agreement with Crispin that there is no such thing as a must read. Why must I read Jane Austen? Who is to say that I will enjoy Pride and Prejudice? Or that I will relate to it at all? Or that I even care? Do I really need to read Hemingway? Really? Who says?
Who decides what books are must reads? I think what you should read depends on what you enjoy. If you are a fan of horror/thriller/mysteries you should probably read Stephen King. But then again, maybe you don't want to and you would rather read Dean Koontz. For me, Stephen King is a must read, but that just means that I must read him, not that you must read him. People are constantly telling others what they should read. It is the whole point of Oprah's Book Club. Here are the books you should read. I've read two books off of the entire list since the book club started and they were both for classes. I don't like reading a book just because it is popular or lots of people read it. You know why? Because I am not lots of people. I have certain tastes that do not necessarily coincide with other peoples' tastes. I enjoy fantasy, romance, mystery, and action. I especially like when they are combined. I love chick lit that has some fantasy and mystery in it, but still has a fight scene. I have a friend who loves fantasy and romance, but doesn't like the action stuff as much, so we have different must read books.
One other reason that I dislike any sort of "must read" "book of the century" "book club" book is that I really don't like people telling me what to do. If you suggest that I may enjoy a book because you know me and know what I like to read, I will probably take your suggestion. If you arbitrarily mandate that everyone must read this book, I will totally avoid that book, even if I may have been planning on reading it anyway. As my sister says, I am contrary.
Next time someone tells you about that Must Read book, go ahead and read it if it sounds like it is something you would enjoy, but don't read it just because someone said to. If you read it due to duty instead of enjoyment you will end up hating it. Just ask any student ever. The majority of books that students are forced to read, they hate. Read things you enjoy and everything else can be read by some other people.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
The Life and Times of a Kinda, Sorta, Almost Geek
I am a geek and a nerd. If we are good friends, this is not news. If we are just acquaintances/coworkers/friends from a very specific setting you may not know this. Because I am not one to freakishly obsess about one franchise or collect anything or play role playing games or play video games. Pretty much any of the traditional (I was going to say normal, but that didn't really seem to fit with the geek/nerd theme) nerdy things associated with geeks. And yet I am most definitely a geek.
Let me explain. My sister plays D&D, likes video games, can tell you more than you need to know about Star Wars, will argue for hours on why Original Series Star Trek is far superior to any other Star Trek, and has been to multiple sci-fi cons. She is what would be considered a geek. She has a few general nerdy things and a couple things that she completely nerds out with. I don't do any of the really nerdy things and I don't have anything that I completely nerd out with. I am a nerd without a cause. I am too normal to have a geek group, but too geek to really be mainstream. Such a sad, lonely, nerd life I live. Except, not really!
So, without further ado...why I am a geek (and a nerd)
I know more about Star Wars than most normal people. That's right. I can quote the original trilogy, know what planets they go to, all the main creatures' names, and much more. I don't know as much as Jenny, but I know plenty. I've also seen quite a bit of original Star Trek and argued for why the new Star Trek movie does, in fact, work with canon. I have been currently geeking out on Doctor Who/Torchwood. If I were to have a geek focus, that would be it. I looked up the Doctor Who time line and tried to figure out how Captain Jack Harkness fits into everything and got confused (see...geeky enough to look it up, not geeky enough to get it).
My biggest nerd thing is that I do puzzles, which really doesn't fall anywhere on the geek scope. Most people think it is kinda neat, in a nerdy sort of way. I read Stephen King and Ted Dekker books, but I also read romance novels. Pretty much the only thing I can discuss at length with any sort of geek cred is Harry Potter, which is really not that nerdy. Though I supposed winning a HP trivia game at a sci-fi con probably counts as fairly nerdy.
I like technology a lot and have my undergrad degree in Security Informatics. I can write SQL, HTML, XML, MODS, Dublin Core, MARC. I can look through pages of script and find that one little piece of code that tells me what I want to know. I can work in command line and have set up a Linux system, complete with workable e-mail. I have also released and played with viruses and hacks (in a controlled environment). However, I really don't care to have the newest technology. I have no desire to have an iPod ever and am thoroughly against anything Apple. And really, that doesn't tend to go over well in the geek world.
I had a coworker not too long ago make a comment that she had no idea that I was a nerd and would never have guessed that. I kinda get that a lot. I consider myself a nerd and a geek, but am kind of ok with people not knowing that I'm a geek. I am like a ninja geek! A Ninja Nerd! I silently infiltrate normal society and then strike with an impressive fact about Star Wars! I think the part of geekdom that I fit into the most is the attitude of just owning what I like. Sure, it might not be as geeky as other people. But it is my geekiness and I like it!
Let me explain. My sister plays D&D, likes video games, can tell you more than you need to know about Star Wars, will argue for hours on why Original Series Star Trek is far superior to any other Star Trek, and has been to multiple sci-fi cons. She is what would be considered a geek. She has a few general nerdy things and a couple things that she completely nerds out with. I don't do any of the really nerdy things and I don't have anything that I completely nerd out with. I am a nerd without a cause. I am too normal to have a geek group, but too geek to really be mainstream. Such a sad, lonely, nerd life I live. Except, not really!
So, without further ado...why I am a geek (and a nerd)
I know more about Star Wars than most normal people. That's right. I can quote the original trilogy, know what planets they go to, all the main creatures' names, and much more. I don't know as much as Jenny, but I know plenty. I've also seen quite a bit of original Star Trek and argued for why the new Star Trek movie does, in fact, work with canon. I have been currently geeking out on Doctor Who/Torchwood. If I were to have a geek focus, that would be it. I looked up the Doctor Who time line and tried to figure out how Captain Jack Harkness fits into everything and got confused (see...geeky enough to look it up, not geeky enough to get it).
My biggest nerd thing is that I do puzzles, which really doesn't fall anywhere on the geek scope. Most people think it is kinda neat, in a nerdy sort of way. I read Stephen King and Ted Dekker books, but I also read romance novels. Pretty much the only thing I can discuss at length with any sort of geek cred is Harry Potter, which is really not that nerdy. Though I supposed winning a HP trivia game at a sci-fi con probably counts as fairly nerdy.
I like technology a lot and have my undergrad degree in Security Informatics. I can write SQL, HTML, XML, MODS, Dublin Core, MARC. I can look through pages of script and find that one little piece of code that tells me what I want to know. I can work in command line and have set up a Linux system, complete with workable e-mail. I have also released and played with viruses and hacks (in a controlled environment). However, I really don't care to have the newest technology. I have no desire to have an iPod ever and am thoroughly against anything Apple. And really, that doesn't tend to go over well in the geek world.
I had a coworker not too long ago make a comment that she had no idea that I was a nerd and would never have guessed that. I kinda get that a lot. I consider myself a nerd and a geek, but am kind of ok with people not knowing that I'm a geek. I am like a ninja geek! A Ninja Nerd! I silently infiltrate normal society and then strike with an impressive fact about Star Wars! I think the part of geekdom that I fit into the most is the attitude of just owning what I like. Sure, it might not be as geeky as other people. But it is my geekiness and I like it!
Friday, October 8, 2010
The Horrific Notion of Boys Reading Captain Underpants Instead of Treasure Island
As I librarian, I follow many library and book centered blogs. One had a link to this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704271804575405511702112290.html?mod=wsj_share_twitter
I am an academic librarian so I rarely if ever see kids so I really don't have a lot of experience with what kids, specifically boys, read. Or why they read or why they don't read. I only know what articles tell me. And yes, I have heard about the "meet them where they are" philosophy of getting kids to read. However, unlike the pretentious Thomas Spence, I find not a lot wrong with this approach.
Apparently elementary and middle school boys don't read enough. Many teachers, librarians, authors, publishers, etc. decided that to get boys to read more they would have books about what boys want to read about. That is apparently a terrible approach. Why should a boy read "The Day My Butt Went Psycho" when they could be reading "Treasure Island". I mean, the horror of boys reading popular fiction about things they enjoy when they could be reading boring classics. I know that personally I hate pulp books that are on a topic I find enjoyable; I would much rather read a boring book that someone at some point decided was a classic.
Spence also claims that having video games makes boys not read. If a boy has a choice between reading or playing video games, he will choose the video games. If a boy has no video games, he will be willing to read Jane Austen. I am a 23 year old female and I won't read Jane Austen. Do you really know any middle school boys who would read it? Probably not many. I am not going to go into why or why not video games are evil and detrimental to reading...perhaps Jenny will write about that since she plays video games.
What I really want to discuss is writing gross out books for boys. I don't think there is anything wrong with it. When I was in elementary school, I read Encyclopedia Brown and Hank the Cowdog; in middle school I had to read star books aka books that someone somewhere decided were good books to read, which then you could take a test on to prove you read and get...something? I know some classes gave extra credit for how many you read. I dunno. But you had to read star books. I hated that! You know why? Because none of the books I wanted to read were star books. We had entire library, but you could only read two shelves of them if you wanted to get points. I feel like that is what Spence is advocating. Instead of letting boys read what strikes their fancy, he wants them to read "good" books.
I hate "good" books for the most part. I like reading stuff written for me. It is like Chick Lit. Is it "good"? No. Will it win any literary awards? Probably not. Is it enjoyable? Most definitely. Does it get people to read? Yes! It is the same thing with Captain Underpants and Sweet Farts (which just fyi is an awesome name that makes me, a 23 year old female librarian, want to read it). Is it "good"? No. Will it spark interest in 12 year old boys? Yes. Will it get them to read? Most definitely. So, how is that wrong?
There is one quote I would like to analyze: "Most importantly, a boy raised on great literature is more likely to grow up to think, to speak, and to write like a civilized man. Whom would you prefer to have shaped the boyhood imagination of your daughter's husband—Raymond Bean or Robert Louis Stevenson?"
1) What is great literature? I mean, Stevenson wrote about pirates and a doctor with a split personality. That seems to be exactly what boys today would want to read, but would be considered crap.
2) Where is there evidence to say that boys who read "great literature" grow up to be civilized? I mean, really. That is just stupid and had no evidence whatsoever.
3) I take issue with the whole "daughter's husband" preference based on a book. It really isn't anyone's business except your daughters.
4) I'm pretty sure I would get along a lot better with a guy who read "Zombie Butts from Uranus" than I would with the guy who read "Pride and Prejudice" as a 6th grader.
5) Why does there have to be a choice between the two the authors. Who is to say that the boy who reads Sweet Farts doesn't go on to be the boy who reads Treasure Island. Once you start enjoying reading you are going to find things more books that you enjoy. Let boys read what they want and then after they read through all the Goosebump books, suggest Mark Twain.
**Right after I finished writing this, I found http://tametheweb.com/2010/09/24/how-to-raise-boys-who-read-hint-not-with-gross-out-books-and-video-game-bribes/ . Video games = reading of some sort.**
I am an academic librarian so I rarely if ever see kids so I really don't have a lot of experience with what kids, specifically boys, read. Or why they read or why they don't read. I only know what articles tell me. And yes, I have heard about the "meet them where they are" philosophy of getting kids to read. However, unlike the pretentious Thomas Spence, I find not a lot wrong with this approach.
Apparently elementary and middle school boys don't read enough. Many teachers, librarians, authors, publishers, etc. decided that to get boys to read more they would have books about what boys want to read about. That is apparently a terrible approach. Why should a boy read "The Day My Butt Went Psycho" when they could be reading "Treasure Island". I mean, the horror of boys reading popular fiction about things they enjoy when they could be reading boring classics. I know that personally I hate pulp books that are on a topic I find enjoyable; I would much rather read a boring book that someone at some point decided was a classic.
Spence also claims that having video games makes boys not read. If a boy has a choice between reading or playing video games, he will choose the video games. If a boy has no video games, he will be willing to read Jane Austen. I am a 23 year old female and I won't read Jane Austen. Do you really know any middle school boys who would read it? Probably not many. I am not going to go into why or why not video games are evil and detrimental to reading...perhaps Jenny will write about that since she plays video games.
What I really want to discuss is writing gross out books for boys. I don't think there is anything wrong with it. When I was in elementary school, I read Encyclopedia Brown and Hank the Cowdog; in middle school I had to read star books aka books that someone somewhere decided were good books to read, which then you could take a test on to prove you read and get...something? I know some classes gave extra credit for how many you read. I dunno. But you had to read star books. I hated that! You know why? Because none of the books I wanted to read were star books. We had entire library, but you could only read two shelves of them if you wanted to get points. I feel like that is what Spence is advocating. Instead of letting boys read what strikes their fancy, he wants them to read "good" books.
I hate "good" books for the most part. I like reading stuff written for me. It is like Chick Lit. Is it "good"? No. Will it win any literary awards? Probably not. Is it enjoyable? Most definitely. Does it get people to read? Yes! It is the same thing with Captain Underpants and Sweet Farts (which just fyi is an awesome name that makes me, a 23 year old female librarian, want to read it). Is it "good"? No. Will it spark interest in 12 year old boys? Yes. Will it get them to read? Most definitely. So, how is that wrong?
There is one quote I would like to analyze: "Most importantly, a boy raised on great literature is more likely to grow up to think, to speak, and to write like a civilized man. Whom would you prefer to have shaped the boyhood imagination of your daughter's husband—Raymond Bean or Robert Louis Stevenson?"
1) What is great literature? I mean, Stevenson wrote about pirates and a doctor with a split personality. That seems to be exactly what boys today would want to read, but would be considered crap.
2) Where is there evidence to say that boys who read "great literature" grow up to be civilized? I mean, really. That is just stupid and had no evidence whatsoever.
3) I take issue with the whole "daughter's husband" preference based on a book. It really isn't anyone's business except your daughters.
4) I'm pretty sure I would get along a lot better with a guy who read "Zombie Butts from Uranus" than I would with the guy who read "Pride and Prejudice" as a 6th grader.
5) Why does there have to be a choice between the two the authors. Who is to say that the boy who reads Sweet Farts doesn't go on to be the boy who reads Treasure Island. Once you start enjoying reading you are going to find things more books that you enjoy. Let boys read what they want and then after they read through all the Goosebump books, suggest Mark Twain.
**Right after I finished writing this, I found http://tametheweb.com/2010/09/24/how-to-raise-boys-who-read-hint-not-with-gross-out-books-and-video-game-bribes/ . Video games = reading of some sort.**
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Review: Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro
a.k.a Kelly Actually Read a Real Book
When I told Jenny that I was reading Never Let Me Go she was surprised and exclaimed (over gmail) "You're actually reading a real book! It has won awards and stuff". And really, that isn't fair. I read real books all the time, I just rarely read "good" books. But I did! It is interesting because I don't often read straight fiction books that are very character driven, but when I do, I always enjoy them. Also, this isn't going to be a normal book review because I kind of suck at summing up books, so I'm just going to kind of discuss it.
I decided to read Never Let Me Go because I saw a trailer for the movie and thought it looked good. In fact, it looked good enough that I wanted to read the book before the movie could ruin the plot for me (something I wish I had done for Fight Club). Sadly, the movie is a UK movie and doesn't have a wide release in the US. If I felt like driving 1 1/2 hours to Boston, I could see it, but that seems like way too much work to see a movie. I'll just wait until it gets released on DVD and get it on Netflix. But that is neither here nor there. Anyway, I saw the trailer, looked up the book, saw that the library I work at had it, checked it out. The only thing I knew about it was what I had seen in the trailer, which wasn't much. I sometimes like reading a book that I have no idea what it is about. Sometimes the name/cover/author/recommendation from a friend is enough for me to just jump in without reading the back of the book. I did that with Never Let Me Go. And really, I feel like the trailer and the book cover don't really represent the story well.
What I really liked about Ishiguro's book was the way it was written. It is written in first person, which I happen to always really enjoy, and is mostly a reflection on the past. The timeline of the story is not exactly linear. It is somewhat linear as far as certain eras of the narrator's life, but within the eras the stories are all intertwined. It really is written much like one would reflect on memories...one recollection sparks another that happened prior, which in turn sparks something that happened later. I just didn't worry about the actual timeline too much and was fine.
What I liked most about the book was that fact that I really had no idea what it was building to. There was definitely a question of "why?" hanging over the entire book. Why are the characters at Hailsham? Why hasn't she seen her friends in so long? Why are they giving donations? And I found that I really had no idea what the book was going to ultimately end up being until the end. That doesn't usually happen with me. Usually I can kind of figure out what a twist might be or where the author is taking the character or what the mystery is, but I was kind of lost the whole time. I do have to say, when I got the end of the book, my response was kind of "Huh...well, that was good and interesting...but...well...hmmmm". Which makes it seem like I didn't enjoy the book, which is not true. I really enjoyed reading the book, but the end was just different from what I had been expecting.
One thing I really enjoyed about Never Let Me Go was that it was very different from everything I have been reading lately. It was a nice change to read a character driven plot that wasn't fantasy or a mystery or a teen book. Just a solid adult fiction book. Variety is good and I'm really glad I randomly picked Never Let Me Go up.
**Added later--I just rewatched the trailer and it really kind of shows a lot of the book, though there are definitely some differences. Apparently after I watched the trailer and decided to read the book I forgot everything about the trailer**
When I told Jenny that I was reading Never Let Me Go she was surprised and exclaimed (over gmail) "You're actually reading a real book! It has won awards and stuff". And really, that isn't fair. I read real books all the time, I just rarely read "good" books. But I did! It is interesting because I don't often read straight fiction books that are very character driven, but when I do, I always enjoy them. Also, this isn't going to be a normal book review because I kind of suck at summing up books, so I'm just going to kind of discuss it.
I decided to read Never Let Me Go because I saw a trailer for the movie and thought it looked good. In fact, it looked good enough that I wanted to read the book before the movie could ruin the plot for me (something I wish I had done for Fight Club). Sadly, the movie is a UK movie and doesn't have a wide release in the US. If I felt like driving 1 1/2 hours to Boston, I could see it, but that seems like way too much work to see a movie. I'll just wait until it gets released on DVD and get it on Netflix. But that is neither here nor there. Anyway, I saw the trailer, looked up the book, saw that the library I work at had it, checked it out. The only thing I knew about it was what I had seen in the trailer, which wasn't much. I sometimes like reading a book that I have no idea what it is about. Sometimes the name/cover/author/recommendation from a friend is enough for me to just jump in without reading the back of the book. I did that with Never Let Me Go. And really, I feel like the trailer and the book cover don't really represent the story well.
What I really liked about Ishiguro's book was the way it was written. It is written in first person, which I happen to always really enjoy, and is mostly a reflection on the past. The timeline of the story is not exactly linear. It is somewhat linear as far as certain eras of the narrator's life, but within the eras the stories are all intertwined. It really is written much like one would reflect on memories...one recollection sparks another that happened prior, which in turn sparks something that happened later. I just didn't worry about the actual timeline too much and was fine.
What I liked most about the book was that fact that I really had no idea what it was building to. There was definitely a question of "why?" hanging over the entire book. Why are the characters at Hailsham? Why hasn't she seen her friends in so long? Why are they giving donations? And I found that I really had no idea what the book was going to ultimately end up being until the end. That doesn't usually happen with me. Usually I can kind of figure out what a twist might be or where the author is taking the character or what the mystery is, but I was kind of lost the whole time. I do have to say, when I got the end of the book, my response was kind of "Huh...well, that was good and interesting...but...well...hmmmm". Which makes it seem like I didn't enjoy the book, which is not true. I really enjoyed reading the book, but the end was just different from what I had been expecting.
One thing I really enjoyed about Never Let Me Go was that it was very different from everything I have been reading lately. It was a nice change to read a character driven plot that wasn't fantasy or a mystery or a teen book. Just a solid adult fiction book. Variety is good and I'm really glad I randomly picked Never Let Me Go up.
**Added later--I just rewatched the trailer and it really kind of shows a lot of the book, though there are definitely some differences. Apparently after I watched the trailer and decided to read the book I forgot everything about the trailer**
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)