Void Fate was an interesting book to read, especially in the current political climate. A mostly dystopian mystery, the story grapples with human nature, the bonds of friendship, and the question “what would I do if…” Opening on a poker night amongst friends, the story takes a dark turn as they wake up in a world that is their own but not. Stuck in a silent world where ghostly human-shaped figures roam the streets they must find their way home, if it even still exists. But when they find a young boy who has been living in this alternate reality for a month, hope begins to run out. Because there is something corrosive in the air, and its been whispering to them all. This book was a blend of dystopia (without being what I consider a true dystopia) and suspense, with a hint of philosophy on the side. Aram, the friend most concerned with making it home to his young family, intrigued me the most. However, the interplay between the friends took on its own character as resolve fractured and the pressure of the situation increased. Though I’m sure there are better mystery solvers out there than I, this book kept me wondering about the solution to get back home until the end. I appreciated that, because I don’t want to figure out the story before the characters do. Or at least, not too much earlier than the characters. I do not normally read suspense novels, so my enjoyment of this one was a bit surprising to me. I wonder if part of it is because the book is also slightly dystopian, a genre that I do enjoy immensely. If you are a reader who likes mystery with consequences and a slight supernatural feel, you’ll likely enjoy this book. And if the characters and the relationships between them are what get you going, even more so. In the mood for a creepy, maybe won’t make it back to the family, read this autumn? Pick up Void Fate. And if you do read it, let me know in the comments and we’ll have a chat about it. Happy Reading!
9 Comments
I love romance novels. They're fun, easy to read, and almost always have a happy for now/ever after ending. And because I read for pleasure, a happy ending is often what I'm searching for. Especially if I'm reading books to get away from reading the news. Or academic papers that tend to require a great deal of brain power to absorb. Romance novels are a get-away for me. And they're also a relatively healthy and safe way to explore my own sexuality. Suffice it to say, I read a lot of romance novels, and while I have my favorite sub-genres I'm excited to read most of them regardless. So when I heard about The Bromance Book Club I was very intrigued. As with every genre, romance has tropes and cliches that can be hard to avoid. Dedicated readers of a genre are likely to overlook some of these since it is very difficult to avoid them, but that means that when a book comes along that seems to defy traditional happenings those readers snap to attention. And I was no different. I hadn't even read a synopsis of the book before I knew that it had the potential to turn things on their heads. The title says it all. Bromance. Now, I've read both homosexual and heterosexual romances. They both have great and not-so-great authors and books. They've both been around for hundreds and hundreds of years. Probably thousands of thousands of years. That isn't the -- dare I say it -- revolutionary bit of this title. The revolutionary bit of this title is that it implies heterosexual males are in a book club that reads romance novels. Mind = blown. Not because men shouldn't be reading romances, but because they so rarely are depicted doing so. Traditionally, romance novels are books written by women for women. This is the greatest strength, and to some extent greatest weakness, of the romance novel genre. Romance novels are considered the pornography of the literary universe by many people. They're "trashy." They aren't intellectual enough. They give women unrealistic expectations of sex, romance, and life in general. If anyone reading this blog post agrees with any of that, I suggest Dangerous Books for Girls: The Bad Reputation of Romance Novels Explained by Maya Rodale. It's an important read that addresses all those things in greater detail and with more references than I will here. But moving on, romance novels also allow women to have expectations of the men in their lives. They let women dream of things that are better than the world we live in, and they do so without being written from the perspective of male authors. Admittedly, the romance genre has a lot of issues with diversity. It's incredibly white-washed and skinny-washed. That is something that hopefully will continue to change. But this book, The Bromance Book Club, normalizes the idea that anyone can, and perhaps should, read romance novels. That is where its power lies. The Bromance Book Club is about a marriage on the rocks. She isn't happy. Hasn't been for a while. He took her for granted but doesn't want to lose her. He is also a man who has been mired in toxic masculinity his entire life. Whose ego is so damaged by the way she's been unhappy, that he can't see a way to fix it. So what are his friends to do? Initiate him into the bromance book club. Of course, he's reluctant. Romance novels aren't supposed to be read by men. It's just porn, right? Wrong, his friends say. It's a road map. Now follow our multi-step program and get your wife, and your happy life, back. So he does. Lyssa Kay Adams tackles really important ideas in this book, and I have high hopes that she will continue to tackle them in the future. First, she acknowledges the reputation that romance novels have but while she does that she makes a case for them. And she does so without throwing it in your face. It's done through the story. She also acknowledges that romance novels can give people unrealistic expectations of the world...just like everything else. The question is whether you also believe that people are going to be smart enough to take fictional stories with the appropriate grains of salt. She normalizes the idea that any person can read any book, even if that isn't what society tells us. Romance isn't just for women. Science fiction space operas aren't just for boys. And finally? She shows us that relationships don't stop at the wedding. That's when the journey is just beginning. And while dreams can help us get through the years, communication and work is what makes a relationship strong. Often romance novels can feel contrived, but The Bromance Book Club feels very real. Usually I don't suggest romance novels for everyone. I'm well aware that they aren't everyone's cup of tea and I'm not going to force my tea preferences on others. However, I do think everyone should read this book. Not for the sexy bits. Not for the happily for now/ever after. But for the statements it makes about keeping a relationship strong and how it is possible to be masculine while being vulnerable. They aren't mutually exclusive. Happy Reading! First, I apologize for the lateness of this post and for missing the last two weeks. Sometimes life happens and I'm getting really busy. But, I'm here today and I'm actually going to give you a glimpse at what happens behind the scenes in libraries: library theory. Actually, no. There's not as much theory in the field of library science as you may think considering how important information is to our profession, but the book I'm reviewing today is, in fact, a book about a theory of information, specifically, the theory of information worlds.
Now, I'll include the reference for the book on this post in APA style, but Information Worlds: Social Context, Technology, and Information Behavior in the Age of the Internet is not like others I've left reviews for. It is not a "fun" book; it's essentially a textbook. So if you're interested, definitely read it. If you just want to read a chapter or two that sounds super interesting, great. But I'm not necessarily writing this review in an effort to convince you to read, or not read, this book. This review is more of a "Wow, that was really interesting and it has x implications" style than a "this book is awesome and everyone should read it" style. The premise of the Theory of Information Worlds is that an individual's information behavior (i.e., the way a person searches for, interacts with, and uses information) is influenced by the multiple "worlds" that make up their life. For example, an avid knitter/crocheter/weaver likely has people, both in person and virtually, that they knit/crochet/weave with and/or share patterns with. This collection of people and the contexts they interact in are one information world. The same person will also have other information worlds, some of which are larger and smaller than others. But within these worlds there are people who are trusted and information that has value or doesn't have value. And these worlds interact with other worlds and overall guide the individual's information behavior. Now, the book goes into much greater detail about this premise and the influence of media, the internet, and libraries on this concept. But while I find this theory very interesting and potentially very influential to my own research, that's not the part of the book that I actually want to call attention to. I want to call attention to Chapter 8, otherwise known as the chapter that calls out politics in a BIG way. Chapter 8 focuses on an aspect of information worlds called information value. Information value is the amount of value an information world places on information in general, specific information, and where information comes from. Information value is different for each information world and is greatly influenced by cultural/societal values. And depending on how powerful certain people are, the information value of a very small world can be imposed on a very large number of people. An entire country, in fact, can have the information value of a single small world imposed on them. And the United States of America is a prime example. Now, this book was written in 2010, and chapter 8 is looking at the influences of President George W. Bush rather than more current administrations, but the premise remains the same. When a person in power is part of a small world whose information value is based on the curtailment of information for whatever reason, the democratic process of said country can be compromised. If accurate information, however damning, isn't shared with the public then the public cannot truly make decisions on who they want to lead their country or what they want those leaders to do. Access to information is important, and the information value held by small worlds in power has lot to do with what information is accessible to a democratic nation. When I was reading this book, specifically Chapter 8, it was another piece of evidence about how many modern librarians/libraries are radical places. Places where access to information is more important than enforcing the information values of those in power. I think reading this book, or even just skimming it, is actually a pretty important thing. But don't just read it. Read it critically. No book or thought is infallible. There can be holes in everything, and maybe you'll see something that just doesn't sit right with you and that will make you go out and do some research and you'll further your own information value. But this book has some really important points about the access, use, and restriction of information. All things that are becoming increasingly important in the era we live in. Happy Reading! Jaeger, P., & Burnett, G. (2010). Information worlds: Social context, technology, and information behavior in the age of the Internet. New York: Routledge. Regardless of a person's opinion about the contents of this novel, I think many of us can agree that the cover is phenomenal! Now, I don't always choose to pick up a book based on its cover, and I didn't entirely choose to read this one based on that either...But it was most definitely a major consideration. I love fairy stories, and I also really enjoy the ones that have fairies as they were before Disney got a hold of them. As in, what the stories used to be before PG ratings existed. I'm talking about the Fair Folk, the Fae, the Tuatha Dé Danann. Sarah J. Maas, Holly Black, Melissa Albert, Sarah Porter, and Megan Shepherd, are all wonderful authors who have written these types of books (there are many more, I just can't necessarily think of them off the top of my head) and I am so happy that this is a recent trend because I love reading books like that. So after I read Margaret Rogerson's book Sorcery of Thorns (another wonderful book I suggest you read) and saw that her debut novel was about the fae and had a phenomenal cover, well I was hooked. The gist of the story is that in the land of Whimsy, the fair folk and mortal humans live in a sort of harmony. Humans are able to use "Craft" (creation of things really, so cooking, writing, drawing/painting, etc.) and the fair folk live for a very, very, very long time and have magic. To be mortal is to be vulnerable, but you can trade the results of your craft to the fair folk in exchange for enchantments (e.g., having the most gorgeous blue eyes, having sheep that only bear twins, etc.) but as with most stories about the fair folk, there's almost always some fine print. Isobel, our main heroine, is a master at her craft and creating bargains that have no loopholes that will hurt her or her family. But then she makes a mistake and paints what she sees in the eyes of Rook, the Autumn Prince: a human emotion. He takes her back to his court to face punishment, but they get waylaid by the wild hunt and end up illegally falling in love as they attempt to navigate a mysterious putrefaction of the Summer lands and the intrigues of the spring court. Will they be able to save themselves or will tragedy tear them apart? Well, you'll have to read the book to find out. ;) Now, on to the review which may contain minor spoilers, but I'll try to keep it mostly general. I enjoyed the book. It portrayed an interesting relationship between human and fae, and it left a lot of room for continued novels in that world. But there was also definitely something that kept it from being phenomenal for me as a reader. It's hard to describe exactly what it was, but the romance seemed rushed without being rushed. There was, to some extent, plenty of time for actual love to grow between Isobel and Rook, but because of Isobel's constant musings about how that would be horrific the sudden fathomless depth of her feelings near the end of the book seemed very jarring to me. I think that the book also didn't quite follow through with all of the descriptions about it. Particularly the one on Goodreads which states, "Because secretly, her Craft represents a threat the fair folk have never faced in all the millennia of their unchanging lives: for the first time, her portraits have the power to make them feel." The significance of this isn't really discussed in the book, at least not the danger it presents to fair folk, except as a glossed over detail that enables a particular battle to fall in Isobel's favor. I hope that if Margaret Rogerson writes further stories that take place in the world of Whimsy she goes into greater detail about it. So overall, it wasn't my favorite book ever about the fair folk, but it was another good read to add into my reading list. And seriously everyone, that cover. I love how it looks so much! And definitely try this book out. It's a world I hope to see more of in the future. Happy Reading! L'Shanah Tova everyone! Happy New Year! May the coming year be sweet and prosperous. Also, may it be full of books. ;) I'm getting back in the reviewing game with this week's blog post, and it may involve a lot of fangirling on my part, because I was introduced to Penny Reid as an author this year and I LOVE her books. So, first off, she is a romance author, if you've read some of my other posts you know I read a lot of those, but as an author she also tackles some heavy things like mental illness, racism, corruption, etc., in her stories. She also writes hilarious books/characters, so even though she can write about intense subjects, there's enough lightness that a reader has a hard time turning away just because they don't want to deal with real questions. Which means that even if a reader doesn't want to deal with the implications of hard things in our world, they'll get some form of reflection on these topics done because they are important to the story. Anyway, on to the review.
Trigger Warning: Sexual assault, abuse, The Laws of Physics is actually a serial of three books about the same characters. It could be considered a second-chance romance but it has a slightly different feel from many books in that category because you don't realize until the second installment that that is what's going to happen. But moving on, this particular series of Penny Reid's deals with complicated family dynamics, consent, and sexual assault, all while exploring the sweet love story of a genius physicist and a musician. And when I say genius physicist, I mean she was working on her undergraduate degree when she was fifteen and she was getting ready to start her doctorate at eighteen. The scene opens with Mona DaVinci taking a call from her twin sister Lisa DaVinci where she is convinced to pull a Parent Trap and take her sister's place at home for about a week. Now, Mona won't be replacing Lisa for her parents (who are famous musicians, by the way), but rather for a man she doesn't know but who is a friend of their older brother, Leo, and is meant to keep an eye on Lisa until their parents get home. Lisa need's Mona's help because, well, she's been arrested. So, long story short, Mona agrees, gets to Chicago, and spends an intense week with a man who is hot, intense, funny, and kind. A guy most women would have a hard time not falling for. A guy who also supposedly hates liars. And queue the entire love story. Now, that's just the first book, and you really should read the book because it's way funnier and nuanced than my spur of the moment summary. Penny Reid does something that I need when I read a book, she creates characters I care about. Characters I want to know more about. While no one is a reader geared towards only one aspect of the book, characters often make or break a book for me. I have a really hard time engaging with and liking books where I cannot connect with or be intrigued by the characters. Books that are good books, that are written well, that have beautiful language, setting, and tone, but don't have characters I'm interested in? I'll usually finish them, but I'll also probably give them a 2-star rating on GoodReads (though I will, of course, explain such a rating and make sure others know they may still like the book). Anyway, Penny Reid does a wonderful job with her characters. I laugh, I cry, I often yell when they're being idiots...In short, she makes them feel real, and so I end up loving them. If you're into contemporary romance novels, give Penny Reid a try. She doesn't disappoint. And if you like romance novels that break into deep topics, definitely give her a read. And if you really just want to read a funny, sexy, light, novel, you'll be okay with her too. So go forth and read Penny Reid! And if you do, let me know what you think. You might not become a fan, but even if you don't, I'd love to talk with you about your thoughts on her books. Happy Reading! I'm coming to terms with the fact that I'm going to have new posts on my blog sometime early in the week (e.g., Sunday or Monday). And sometimes I'm going to be later than that. Overall, though, I've been much better about updating this blog than any other blogs in the past, so at least there's that...Now, on to the main event! A review of a book by one of my favorite contemporary YA authors: Rainbow Rowell. I was first introduced to Rainbow Rowell when my bookclub read her YA book, Fangirl (yes, you should all read that one too) and I was so happy I read it. So of course I read Carry On, too. Carry On is the fanfiction that one of the characters in Fangirl was writing, and I'm so happy Rainbow Rowell actually wrote it (the sequel to Carry On, Wayward Son, is also coming out in September, just saying). Then I read Attachments, which is an adult contemporary novel by Rainbow Rowell, and I was not disappointed at all. That being said, up until yesterday, I hadn't read the book that many people think put Rainbow Rowell on the map: Eleanor & Park. But now I have, and I'm ecstatic that I did. Because it was awesome!!! There are definitely times that I've avoided contemporary novels in the YA genre that deal with romance. I have found that many of them feel too dramatic for me, and I sometimes end up wanting to yell at the main characters. Part of this is probably because I was homeschooled, so the "normal" high school type relationships have always been slightly foreign to me. I'm also not going to lie, I get this way about many adult/new-adult contemporary romance novels. While there are things that I can shrug off when it's fantasy, paranormal, sci-fi, or historical romance (because obviously I have no real experience with those so I can't complain too much if there's bits of it that annoy me because maybe that's just how it was/is in those settings) it is harder for me to do so when the setting and characters are real-time and my age or an age I've already lived through. I say all of that to set the scene that it takes a really good contemporary YA novel to keep me reading. And I finished this book in a single day. Eleanor & Park hit that perfect spot between sweet and hot when it came to the romance, but this book was about more than just two slightly misfit teens finding each other and embarking on a relationship that may last past their formative years. It was about finding yourself even as you find another person. I get that that isn't necessarily encouraged when you think about things logically. You shouldn't be using another person as a crutch to tell you who you are. That tends to end badly even in books. What happens in this book, however, is more of two people meeting, interacting, and then being willing to explore more of their own wants/needs because they realize that not everyone has the same options and/or they now have a safe place to make those explorations. It is a story of friendship as well as love, and there is plenty of tension (romantic and otherwise) thrown into the mix. Lovers of Sarah Dessen and Rainbow Rowell's other books are probably going to enjoy Eleanor & Park. The characters draw you in and the sweetness of the romance is well balanced by the realities of life (some of which are relatively universal teenage troubles and some of which are ones we thank a higher power that we never had to experience). I wish I had read this book earlier in some ways, but I'm very glad that I read it now. I think I can appreciate some parts of it more as an adult (though still a new one) that I may not have as a teenager. As with many books, this one may not be for everyone, but I suggest everyone give it a try anyway. And if you read any of Rainbow Rowell's books, let me know in the comments. I'm always happy to talk about them! Happy Reading! I'm not necessarily going to be discussing a single book in this book review post, but I am going to be addressing a topic that I think is interesting based on a book I recently read and reviewed on GoodReads. Since I'm in Colorado now, I have access to a series of books that weren't at the Arlington/DC libraries. Now, over the past five years I had read this series two times, and I'm starting my third time through. It's a paranormal-ish romance series, and like I said, I'm reading it for the third time. The concept is one that I enjoy despite how horribly it portrays human nature (or perhaps because it helps portray the racism, bigotry, and idiocy of current society in a way that is "safe" and might potentially get through to those of us who somehow can't quite connect the dots between things our current political landscape is allowing and things that happen in genocides), where humans have been kept as scientific subjects by a corporation working on "super soldiers"/medical improvements and been genetically enhanced in some way but the public found out, the people are rescued, and now the government is trying to figure out how to cover their butts since they were a major funder of the research. So now the former test-subjects have been given some/full autonomy while remaining US citizens and have their own places to live, but of course hate groups happen and say that these people don't have a right to exist. You can imagine what happens next, especially since these are romance. ;)
Stories/series like this have always been compelling to me. I started with Lora Leigh's Breeds series and then catapulted off into similar but slightly different series'. And many of them were well-written. Lora Leigh's writing is great (though it has grown a lot since the first book of the Breeds), and Cynthia Eden is no slough either. However, this series that I'm re-reading now, is a little different. Laurann Dohner's New Species series is one I used as a template for the explanation above. I enjoy the concept. And like I've mentioned a few times, this isn't my first rodeo through her books. But her writing technique...leaves something to be desired. I think I noticed that in the first and second read-throughs, but it is more apparent now than I remember it being. Of course, writing and the response to writing is highly subjective (which is why many of the math people I know state they like math more), but there are still some objective ways to tell if a story is well written. For example, using passive voice isn't the greatest strategy for a novel. It sort of creates a disconnect between the character and what they are feeling/doing. Stating that "this occurrence made me feel terrified" is vastly different than stating "this occurrence terrified me." One is choppy and one is not. One "tells" the reader and one "shows" the reader. Do you remember which one your fifth grade composition teacher liked more? Because I do. Another example is dialogue and the use of contractions. Dialogue is super important for novels that have a lot of talking, and most romance novels have a lot of talking. But in modern times, contractions (i.e., isn't instead of is not, couldn't instead of could not, it's instead of it is, etc.,) are used frequently in speech. As such, dialogue in books that has sparse contractions doesn't read as smoothly. It doesn't mimic speech as we hear it in our every day lives and so it doesn't "sound" as good when we read it (even when we're not reading aloud). Contractions are so important that not including them can sometimes even change the intonation of characters for me, which can change the meaning of what they say. And if that changed meaning doesn't jive with what's happening in the story? Well, that means I have to stop, go back, re-read, and as a reader that's frustrating. But somehow, despite the examples above being prevalent in the New Species series, I'm reading it for the third time in 5 years! And you know what? Even though I'm really noticing these writing issues, I'm not going to stop. I want to keep reading. I'm almost compelled to keep reading. Now, my personal opinion is that Laurann Dohner has crafted a world and characters well and because those are more important to me in terms of whether I like a book, I'll keep reading because of them. Which is great. But here's my conundrum. I like to leave reviews and ratings that are helpful to other people. I usually rate/write reviews on Goodreads. But how do I quantify books that aren't technically well-written but I keep coming back to? Many people don't read the actual reviews, so even if I go through and explain that a higher rating is because I've re-read the book so many times people may not know that's why I'm giving it four out of five stars. And if they trust my judgement and go only off my rating but see all the issues with the writing and stop, does that mean I've "failed" them with my review? My personal opinion is that I'm going to give it a high rating because something about that book/series is good enough that I came back for more, but I'm not the only reviewer out there. What's your opinion on this? Would you give a high rating to a book you've re-read multiple times even if the writing technique is bad? Or do you base your ratings mostly on technique and don't care if you've read it multiple times if the writings bad? What do you wish other reviewers would do? Let me know in the comments! Happy Reading! So for those of you who don't know yet, because I don't believe I've done much with them on this blog so far, I am an avid romance reader. As in, you'll see my Goodreads feed full of them, with a sprinkling of Fantasy and Science Fiction and YA and maybe a very small dash of non-fiction in the form of memoirs. I LOVE romance novels. That being said, my baseline rating on Goodreads is three stars. Which means I liked the book, but it wasn't necessarily phenomenal enough that I would get super animated when telling you about it unless it pertained to a conversation we were already having; that's reserved for four star books. And five star books are those that I suggest everyone read even if I know it's not their usual cup of tea. But I digress. Today, you all get to experience my love of romance novels because I'm going to review one for you: The Unhoneymooners by Christina Lauren.
Now, Christina Lauren is actually two separate authors writing as one. They've written a lot of romances, and most of them that I've read I've enjoyed. And the book is written seamlessly enough that, as far as I personally can tell, you don't notice that there is more than one author. Christina Lauren's books are usually fun, snarky, and a nice break from the world, and The Unhoneymooners does not disappoint on that score. Like some of the other books I've read, this is an "enemies to lovers" contemporary romance, but there's also a little twist: turns out, the heroine's twin sister just married the hero's older brother. In a non-romance novel, this wouldn't necessarily be a big deal. It may cause a little extra strife during holidays, but as long as no one actively tried to kill someone life would go on. But this is a romance novel. Which means that things do go wrong, and it results in the heroine and hero going on the honeymoon meant for their siblings. Our heroine has to pretend to be her sister, since the honeymoon is paid for by contest winnings and anyone other than the winner going is considered fraud. The hero is, of course, off the hook, since he has the same last name as his brother and the "designated guest" of the winner was only listed by last name. So these two new in-laws who hate each other now have to pretend to be married or the whole thing goes up in flame and she has to also pretend to be her sister. To up the stakes, as though they weren't high enough already, her new boss is there and his ex-girlfriend who broke his heart is there, both thinking that our heroine and hero are themselves and married, all while the resort staff think they're other people and married. In short, it's a mess. But this is romance! So it all works out in the end. ;) I enjoyed this book a lot. I don't normally go for "enemies to lovers," because sometimes it feels icky depending on how the author presents it. This particular arc was based on a misunderstanding and some duplicity on the part of the recently married husband (SPOILER: he's a jerk, and much stronger words too). While that's still a little problematic, it's not as worrying as some of the stories I've read that include power differentials between the characters that make it more like blackmail and/or harassment. If you're looking for a fun, snarky, and romantic read for the summer, I definitely suggest this book. Do be aware that there are explicit sexual scenes though. What's a summer read you suggest? Let me know in the comments. And if you end up reading this book, let me know so we can talk about it. Happy reading! These past few days most of the world has been dealing with a heat wave. And what a heat wave it has been. As someone who prefers cold to heat (not that I don't get cold easily, but I'd rather bundle up than have to deal with social codes regarding how much I can take off; not to mention it's easier to add more layers and become somewhat comfortable, but I digress), the temperatures lately have been what I imagine the classic Christian version of hell looks like. Because I'm sorry, there's no way hell has dry heat, no matter how many fires are burning. Humidity would make the whole thing that much worse, which means the traditional Christian version of hell is likely to have a boatload of humidifiers working overtime to keep up with all the fire. And I digress again. With temperatures in the high nineties and dew points in the seventies, it's not at all comfortable to venture outside for anything. Which is why it's the perfect weather to stay in and read. ;)
Which is why I finished four books over this weekend...This does not mean I also got everything else I needed to do this weekend done. The opposite in fact. I should have been packing up boxes. But reading! And I had the perfect excuse too! It's too hot and muggy and gross outside to do something productive outside or do errands, so I might as well stay in and read. Of course, this is going to make the coming week when I actually have to get everything but two suitcases worth of my apartment packed up and shipped out that much more stressful and void of reading. And when I'm freaking out about packing, and writing my sort of poetry performance for a Moishe House event, and writing my speech for my work, I will most definitely be kicking myself in the butt. But right now, I'm just happy that I've been able to read the books that I have this weekend. They were quick and easy reads, but definitely enjoyable. And barring one, Purity in Death by J.D. Robb, they didn't bring to mind the steaming heat outside. So today's post is sort of just a testament to the fact that as a bookworm, I can find an excuse to sit down and read a book in pretty much any weather. Be it rainy, windy, snowy, or sunny, it's always the perfect day to read something. And that concludes today's post, because today I just enjoyed being myself and reading a good book. Happy reading! Edit: I just saw the following picture on my FaceBook feed, and I believe it pretty much encapsulates this post... Right, so I'm going to mention this only because I almost spit water all over my laptop when I heard of it, but it doesn't really have any bearing on the rest of the post so feel free to skip to the next paragraph if you wish. Can we just appreciate that the Christian group calling for Good Omens to be removed from the streaming service because it was, you know, not very reverent to their point of view, got the wrong platform? I mean, I find it incredibly unlikely that no one in that group double checked to make sure it was, in fact, Netflix that was producing and streaming this show that is apparently so terrible. I find the lack of competence in that whole deal disturbing. Of course, there likely was someone who saw they got it wrong and fixed it up pretty quickly, but the internet moves incredibly fast these days (I wonder if Crowley has any influence in this particular happenstance? ;) ) and unfortunately human beings are all too willing to rag on each other about small mistakes. The internet just makes it easier for us to do so. And yes, I am fully aware that I just did the same exact thing as the rest of humanity. It is something I have to work on still. Sometimes though, I just need that little bit of absurdity to lighten my day and stresses. Anyway. Onward!
I'm going to preface this post by stating that it has been about a year since I read the book Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett and therefore I don't remember things as well as I might have if the "movie" (yes, I know it's a mini-series but close enough in this case) had been out when I finished reading it. This, coupled with the fact that Neil Gaiman himself wrote (or at least had a great deal of influence in the writing of, though I'm pretty sure the wrote the entirety of) the screenplay, means that I can't really pick out huge, glaring issues. Now, this does not mean that there weren't any big changes from the book to the mini-series, it's just that I didn't notice them. So while this post is supposedly a "Book Vs. Movie" post, it's more going to be a few paragraphs about how awesome the mini-series was and how I think everyone should read the book and watch the mini-series if possible. I do not, however, think you should purchase AmazonPrime simply to watch the mini-series. Surely it will be out at some point on DVD and you can watch it there, or you can potentially get one of those free trials and cancel before you have to pay, or maybe you know someone who has Prime for a completely different reason and you can have them help you access it. The point is, don't spend $110 a year for a single series. But you should still watch it if at all possible. Here's why. Regardless of whether you believe in G-d or not, whether you're a part of an organized religion, or if you believe the stories/prophecies written in the book of Revelation in the Newer Testament of the Christian Bible, there are lessons (I tend to talk about those a lot here on this blog somehow, so I'm going to switch it up and call them themes for the rest of this post) that pretty much everyone could benefit from. If they're willing to listen. Now, these themes I'm going to speak of are the big ones that resonate with me. There's probably a whole lot more in the book/mini-series that other individuals can pick out. As such, communication is key. So if you think I missed something, let me know in the comments. Or if you want to talk about one of the themes I bring up, mention it in the comments. I'm always up for a lively discussion. One: When there are only two sides there's usually a cluster-something-or-other. Yes, there is a specific word you can insert there that makes it sound much shorter and sweeter, but as many of you know, cursing is not something my mother approves of and while I do not mind others cursing in my presence I try and keep my own to a minimum so I don't shock her when I visit. Anyway. There are two big sides in the book/mini-series. Heaven and Hell. And the two main agents of these sides have been left far to long in the world and neither quite agrees with their side anymore. But there are only two. So they have to make a choice even when both choices result in Armageddon which they would rather avoid. Sound familiar? Two choices, especially ones that are supposedly black and white, usually result in not so great things. Spectrums seem to be a better choice overall. Why do you think there's the stereotype about two Jews and three opinions? Because choosing between two things ends up being not much of a choice at all. You tend to choose "the lesser of two evils" because there isn't an actual good answer. Now, that's not saying that there's always a "good" answer, a choice that is "correct." But having more options means that even if all the answers are somewhat "bad/wrong," you can still end up with one that's "better than all the rest and actually somewhat positive" rather than "the best we can do and it still sucks." I'm not going to get into the issue of too many choices here. But I much prefer the Dungeons and Dragons version of possibilities (Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, Neutral Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, and Chaotic Evil) better than a cut and dried "you're either with us or against us" motto. More than two options allows for redemption and openness to other people more than "good and evil" does. But that's just my opinion. Two: It's never too late. This is important. Spoiler alert for those who haven't read or watched, but Adam starts Armageddon. It's coming. The four horsemen are here, nuclear war seems inevitable, and both sides are ready to battle. And then it stops. Yes, there's more detail to it than that, but that's the gist of it. They were able to stop it, to avert disaster, to make things, well, maybe not right but at least relatively normal again. All it took was never giving up, a bit of ingenuity, and a solid team. If Adam's friends hadn't been there to help him, and fight for him, things would have ended up differently. So make connections with people and don't give up on the world just because some grown-ups messed it up. That's a reason to fix it, not destroy it. Three (last one for this post, I promise): Stand with your chosen family. Most people have heard the phrase blood is thicker than water. And then some people mention that a less condenced version of the phrase is that blood of the covenant is thicker than water of the womb. And then you start getting into which quote was the original one, and did it originate in this German text in the 1300s or was it this Arabic text in 1400 and so on and so forth. Also, Wikipedia wormholes exist and they are incredibly dangerous. Should we blame (or thank depending on your opinion) Crowley for that too? Anyway. The point of the phrase above could be that your loyalty to your blood family should be stronger than the water in the river of friendship. Or alternatively, that the loyalty you have for your friends of choice, honed through the trials of blood, should be stronger than the water in the womb you share with your family. My perspective: get rid of the concept of blood and water. They confuse things. In many cases, yes, I believe that family is very important and protecting your family is important too. But, not everyone has a family like mine. And even in mine, I can see where in some cases it was better for someone to choose people outside of the "blood" to give loyalty to. A person shouldn't be forced to choose one side simply because they share biological material. So my thought is that while there are people we are biologically related to who might be considered our family, family is also a choice of the individual. I consider my closest biological relatives to be my family, and I consider many of the further out biological relatives to be my family too, along with their spouses and children and in-laws. But there are also friends, non-biologically related to me friends, who I consider part of my family. Friends who I have as much loyalty to as I do to my biologically related family. Friends like Crowley and Aziraphale. Friends like Adam, Pepper, Wensleydale and Brian. Chosen family. Family they stood with regardless of what they were up against. And yes, you could bring up the fact that Pepper and Wensleydale and Brian and Dog were going to "abandon" Adam, but that's another discussion that would make this post even longer than it already is, so I'm going to leap over that rabbit hole and continue on. You can choose who you consider family, and you stand by those chosen ones. This does not mean that you can't hold them accountable to their actions. But it does mean you stand with them even as they face consequences. Stand by them, and you might just help us all avoid Armageddon. So that was a super long post, and it could have been way longer. But I'll stop here. If you have thoughts, additions, corrections, etc., just post them in the comments. Like I said, I'm always up for a good discussion. Happy Reading! |
AuthorThe author is a librarian who reads "too much" (is there such a thing?) and talks just as much. As an aspiring author she gets bogged down by grammar rules when she just wants to forget them to make a sentence flow, but never seems to be able to. She appreciates thoughtful comments and constructive criticism, but internet trolls beware, she's read enough fantasy novels to know how to defeat the monsters. Archives
October 2020
Categories
All
|