I watched the excellent movie with Colin Firth first and read the book second, but I don't think that hampered my enjoyment. Rather, I think that enhanced it. I found the movie hilarious, and I know seeing the lines acted out made the text of the play come alive when I perused it afterwards. This play was truly funny, completely ridiculous and sardonic, with bits of wit interspersed in the craziness.
Jack leads a double life, posing as wild "Ernest" in the city, while continuing his sober life as "Jack" in the country. His friend Algy catches on, and jumps into his country life as Ernest himself. Algy, as Ernest, woos Jack's ward Cecily, while the woman Jack wooed as Ernest comes to find him. Hilarities ensue. Wilde was an incredibly funny man.
Saturday, April 30, 2005
Friday, April 29, 2005
A Good Man is Hard to Find by Flannery O'Connor
I think I only checked out this book because of the author's cool name. For future reference, that really isn't a good reason to read anything.
A Good Man is Hard to Find is basically a collection of short stories depicting various characters in the American South during the mid-20th century. A religious vein runs through it all. From what I understand, O'Connor was a Catholic, so it makes sense. What I didn't understand was the subversive, mocking undertone that pervades the entirety of her work. Each story was sardonic, ironic, and fraught with flawed, dissatisfied people whose frustration with life was palpable. Needless to say, I did not enjoy it.
I am less than enamored with the South. I wonder if O'Connor felt the same way I do, for she mocks Southerners mercilessly. Her stories are taut flashes of Southern life, written with an undeniable skillfulness, but with a tragic disdain. I totally understand such a stance, but cannot delight in a book of such sentiments.
A Good Man is Hard to Find is basically a collection of short stories depicting various characters in the American South during the mid-20th century. A religious vein runs through it all. From what I understand, O'Connor was a Catholic, so it makes sense. What I didn't understand was the subversive, mocking undertone that pervades the entirety of her work. Each story was sardonic, ironic, and fraught with flawed, dissatisfied people whose frustration with life was palpable. Needless to say, I did not enjoy it.
I am less than enamored with the South. I wonder if O'Connor felt the same way I do, for she mocks Southerners mercilessly. Her stories are taut flashes of Southern life, written with an undeniable skillfulness, but with a tragic disdain. I totally understand such a stance, but cannot delight in a book of such sentiments.
Monday, April 25, 2005
Lieutenant Hornblower by C.S. Forester
I watched the excellent A&E series of movies before cracking this book open, so I was a bit disappointed. The movies were embellished, and it was a better story because of it. The book tells the story through the eyes of Lieutenant Bush, a secondary character in the film, and makes no mention of Archie Kennedy, a key player in the movie. Still, the book had its merits.
Forester did his psychological motives routine, but it was all centered around Bush, whose motives are not nearly as much fun to analyze as Horatio's. I suppose he meant to juxtapose Hornblower and Bush a la Doyle's format with Watson and Holmes.
The book included a lot of naval terminology that I know went over my head, perhaps lessening my understanding of the extent of Forester's narrative. Nevertheless, the story was there, though perhaps in a less dramatic form than I had expected because of the movies.
The ending encompassed more time than the movie's did, and it shed new light on the character of Horatio. It was an enjoyable foray into his personal life, with a slightly bittersweet conclusion hinting at the lackluster marriage that follows in the later novels.
When the narrative moves away from Lieutenant Bush, Forester crafts infinitely better stories. For Bush was quite dull, and Forester said so himself.
Forester did his psychological motives routine, but it was all centered around Bush, whose motives are not nearly as much fun to analyze as Horatio's. I suppose he meant to juxtapose Hornblower and Bush a la Doyle's format with Watson and Holmes.
The book included a lot of naval terminology that I know went over my head, perhaps lessening my understanding of the extent of Forester's narrative. Nevertheless, the story was there, though perhaps in a less dramatic form than I had expected because of the movies.
The ending encompassed more time than the movie's did, and it shed new light on the character of Horatio. It was an enjoyable foray into his personal life, with a slightly bittersweet conclusion hinting at the lackluster marriage that follows in the later novels.
When the narrative moves away from Lieutenant Bush, Forester crafts infinitely better stories. For Bush was quite dull, and Forester said so himself.
Catch-22 by Joseph Heller
Well, to sum up Catch-22 in three words: sex, sarcasm, and satire. That was about the entire book. It was the story of a WWII pilot and his experiences, plus those of many of his comrades. Another anti-war novel, I found it comparable to Slaughterhouse Five in many respects. The irreverency, the denial of the brave American soldier stereotype, and the proliferation of sex were present in both, but more so in Catch-22, if only because of its length.
Frankly, I was shocked at the number of sexual encounters depicted in this book, and the blase way in which they were treated. The rampant infidelity disconcerted me. But, I suppose, it is just another consequence of war.
Despite the flagrant explicitness, I found myself enjoying Heller's prose. His catch-22 was present even within his semantics. He got his point across very efficiently.
Of the entire book, though, perhaps the most shocking was the happy ending. So many 20th century authors gave their depressing novels equally depressing conclusions, but not Heller. The main character, Yossarian, discovers his friend is alive, and he takes off to join him. Remarque killed off his protagonist in All Quiet on the Western Front, Vonnegut's guy is stuck in the continual reliving of his life, but Heller sends Yossarian off with a beam of hope.
Gruesome violence, explicit sex, and incompetent leadership were eye-opening, but the basically happy ending was quite a different sort of shock.
Frankly, I was shocked at the number of sexual encounters depicted in this book, and the blase way in which they were treated. The rampant infidelity disconcerted me. But, I suppose, it is just another consequence of war.
Despite the flagrant explicitness, I found myself enjoying Heller's prose. His catch-22 was present even within his semantics. He got his point across very efficiently.
Of the entire book, though, perhaps the most shocking was the happy ending. So many 20th century authors gave their depressing novels equally depressing conclusions, but not Heller. The main character, Yossarian, discovers his friend is alive, and he takes off to join him. Remarque killed off his protagonist in All Quiet on the Western Front, Vonnegut's guy is stuck in the continual reliving of his life, but Heller sends Yossarian off with a beam of hope.
Gruesome violence, explicit sex, and incompetent leadership were eye-opening, but the basically happy ending was quite a different sort of shock.
Thursday, April 21, 2005
The African Queen by C.S. Forester
I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Forester started The African Queen right off with action, killing the potentially boring character and not giving any backstory. His plot was innovative and different, a romantic adventure carried by only two characters for the bulk of the novel. These characters were peculiar and unlikely, homely and average, and yet engaging and perfectly suited to the story.
Forester's treatment of the slightly explicit romance did not even rile me. It was chaste enough, convincing enough, and un-extraordinary enough to render it essential to the story. Not material for the youngest readers, perhaps, but after all I've read, modest in comparison.
Forester presented, on the whole, a healthy view of God. His missionay female lead frees herself from the rather legalistic beliefs her deceased brother had imposed upon her, and she repents her exploits wholeheartedly toward the end.
The prose was pretty and not too long-winded, reminiscent of The Scarlet Pimpernel in its fast-paced, 20th-century sensibility. Forester's ruminations over his characters' motives, psychological makeups, and thought processes were insightful and well-put, much as they were in the Horatio Hornblower series.
Forester's treatment of the slightly explicit romance did not even rile me. It was chaste enough, convincing enough, and un-extraordinary enough to render it essential to the story. Not material for the youngest readers, perhaps, but after all I've read, modest in comparison.
Forester presented, on the whole, a healthy view of God. His missionay female lead frees herself from the rather legalistic beliefs her deceased brother had imposed upon her, and she repents her exploits wholeheartedly toward the end.
The prose was pretty and not too long-winded, reminiscent of The Scarlet Pimpernel in its fast-paced, 20th-century sensibility. Forester's ruminations over his characters' motives, psychological makeups, and thought processes were insightful and well-put, much as they were in the Horatio Hornblower series.
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess
Yet another futuristic dystopia, a la 1984 and Brave New World. But this one had good things to say. Burgess' crowning jewel was his fervent belief in free choice and free will. His main character temporarily loses the ability to do anything wrong against society in general. This drives him to an unsuccessful attempt at suicide. His autonomy is eventually restored to him and he reverts back to his former, extremely depraved, self.
However, Burgess ends with a provocative chapter that was apparently left out of the orginal American version of the book. In the true ending, the main character reaches the age of eighteen, and he begins to lose the desire to indulge in antisocial behavior. He runs into a newly married acquaintance and discovers he wants the same for himself. He reflects, and realizes his would-be son would follow in his footsteps as an inevitable part of youth. The end.
Of course, that perhaps lends itself to the interpretation that depravity is merely a childhood attribute that one eventually grows out of. Obviously, that does not hold true. Still, Burgess' commentary on free will is important. Free will, the choice to do what ones wants, is imperative in a functioning society. Otherwise, citizens would be robots subject to the whims of the governing authorities. And that would not be a good thing.
However, Burgess ends with a provocative chapter that was apparently left out of the orginal American version of the book. In the true ending, the main character reaches the age of eighteen, and he begins to lose the desire to indulge in antisocial behavior. He runs into a newly married acquaintance and discovers he wants the same for himself. He reflects, and realizes his would-be son would follow in his footsteps as an inevitable part of youth. The end.
Of course, that perhaps lends itself to the interpretation that depravity is merely a childhood attribute that one eventually grows out of. Obviously, that does not hold true. Still, Burgess' commentary on free will is important. Free will, the choice to do what ones wants, is imperative in a functioning society. Otherwise, citizens would be robots subject to the whims of the governing authorities. And that would not be a good thing.
Sunday, April 10, 2005
Death Comes for the Archbishop by Willa Cather
Some authors take interesting stuff and keep it interesting. Some authors take interesting stuff and make it boring. Still other authors take boring stuff and make it interesting. It is the rare author who can take boring stuff and make it even more boring. And yet, that is the enigma that is Willa Cather.
As if My Antonia's meandering, pointless descriptions of Nebraska and terrible narrative point of view (I cannot stand women writing from a male perspective, especially in the first person- what incredible presumption!) weren't enough, Cather follows up with a tedious chronicle of some priest's endeavors to convert the American southwest to Catholicism.
Cather is completely obsessed with landscapes. She just rambles on and on with metaphors and personification indefatiguably. Superfluous, flowery language does not a classic piece of literature make.
And the Catholicism. Leagalism to the point of nausea. Why don't they let the poor priests marry? The illicit scandals the book describes, and the ones still going on today, do nothing for the church.
As if My Antonia's meandering, pointless descriptions of Nebraska and terrible narrative point of view (I cannot stand women writing from a male perspective, especially in the first person- what incredible presumption!) weren't enough, Cather follows up with a tedious chronicle of some priest's endeavors to convert the American southwest to Catholicism.
Cather is completely obsessed with landscapes. She just rambles on and on with metaphors and personification indefatiguably. Superfluous, flowery language does not a classic piece of literature make.
And the Catholicism. Leagalism to the point of nausea. Why don't they let the poor priests marry? The illicit scandals the book describes, and the ones still going on today, do nothing for the church.
Friday, April 08, 2005
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
For some reason, I was satisfied with this book. Yes, it bore an uncanny resemblance to 1984, in all its detailed sordidness, but it had some advantages. After all, Brave New World was written 15 years before, rendering Huxley more prophetical than Orwell. And Huxley actually allowed for God. One character, wrapped up in the government system as he was, even said he believed there is a God, albeit one revealed through a pluralistic worldview involving all the gods mixed together.
Secondarily, Brave New World was just written more skillfully. Huxley employed a concise, fast-paced prose style, and his characters and world were better-looking than Orwell's, at least in my imagination. Orwell meandered and spent scores of pages soliloquizing on boring details of his futuristic government; Huxley neglected to do so.
I was disappointed with the end of Brave New World, which involves a key character reverting to asceticism before suicide, but Huxley's worldview, while including some spirituality, was by no means exclusively Christian.
One last reason for my enthusiam for this novel would have to be that the author was, I am almost ashamed to say it, surprisingly good-looking. No, really. If you just remove his dorky inch-thick glasses, you have something there.
Secondarily, Brave New World was just written more skillfully. Huxley employed a concise, fast-paced prose style, and his characters and world were better-looking than Orwell's, at least in my imagination. Orwell meandered and spent scores of pages soliloquizing on boring details of his futuristic government; Huxley neglected to do so.
I was disappointed with the end of Brave New World, which involves a key character reverting to asceticism before suicide, but Huxley's worldview, while including some spirituality, was by no means exclusively Christian.
One last reason for my enthusiam for this novel would have to be that the author was, I am almost ashamed to say it, surprisingly good-looking. No, really. If you just remove his dorky inch-thick glasses, you have something there.
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad
Heart of Darkness is a meandering account of a seaman sent to the depths of the African jungle to retrieve an ill ivory agent who is revered throughout the area for his diplomatic and oratorical abilities. This thin plot is buried beneath layers of symbolism and indiscernible language. Conrad's ultimate conclusion involves the depravity of the human heart, although whether he effectively made his point I cannot determine.
Everything is sketched out so lightly the story is hard to own. Kurtz is the amazing agent who has commandeered the ivory trade in colonial Africa, but his engaging personality is told to the reader rather than shown, and his corrupted nature is barely hinted at. I suppose I am a product of an overstimulated culture that reiterates points over and over to the point of ridiculousness, and I just am not subtle enough to pick up on the genius of Conrad. Oh well. My loss, I'm sure.
Everything is sketched out so lightly the story is hard to own. Kurtz is the amazing agent who has commandeered the ivory trade in colonial Africa, but his engaging personality is told to the reader rather than shown, and his corrupted nature is barely hinted at. I suppose I am a product of an overstimulated culture that reiterates points over and over to the point of ridiculousness, and I just am not subtle enough to pick up on the genius of Conrad. Oh well. My loss, I'm sure.
Sunday, April 03, 2005
Sense and Sensibility by Jane Austen
Good old Jane Austen. She never fails to entertain. Sense and Sensibility was sufficiently pleasant, suitably suspenseful, and ultimately satisfying. The story proceeded at a constant, steady pace. The main characters, two sisters, provided interesting contrasts. Of course, it was all consummately Austen—single girls with little income and therefore little chance of marrying well, end up marrying well. But it is a charming plot device even the third or fourth time around.
Extensive immersion in 19th-century literature has conditioned me to the point where I can sense the feelings that were trying to be conveyed by these authors. I have familiarized myself with the language and its conventions through a glut of books and movies, and now I can understand almost everything that is said, and I can knock out a book like this in a few days.
At the gym once, I was watching daytime television, and a woman was promoting her newly released novel. She mentioned that romances are not just an emerging trend, for, after all, "what was Jane Austen writing two hundred years ago, but highbrow chick lit?" That made me laugh so much.
But how true. Austen's stuff is, fundamentally, just romance. But the chasteness, the propriety, the verbal sparring, the defiance of class, the delightful plot twists, the extensive vocabularies, the inherent reverence- it all makes her work something more.
Extensive immersion in 19th-century literature has conditioned me to the point where I can sense the feelings that were trying to be conveyed by these authors. I have familiarized myself with the language and its conventions through a glut of books and movies, and now I can understand almost everything that is said, and I can knock out a book like this in a few days.
At the gym once, I was watching daytime television, and a woman was promoting her newly released novel. She mentioned that romances are not just an emerging trend, for, after all, "what was Jane Austen writing two hundred years ago, but highbrow chick lit?" That made me laugh so much.
But how true. Austen's stuff is, fundamentally, just romance. But the chasteness, the propriety, the verbal sparring, the defiance of class, the delightful plot twists, the extensive vocabularies, the inherent reverence- it all makes her work something more.
Saturday, April 02, 2005
Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut
When evaluating religions and sects, it is helpful to analyze what each says about Jesus, for that is often the differentiating factor that sets them apart. Likewise with Slaughterhouse Five. When the first page presented a line from "Away in a Manger," I knew I was going to encounter some religious discussion.
Vonnegut makes reference to Jesus throughout his book. Much of the action takes place during World War II, and so he makes the main character a chaplain's assistant and says Jesus's name was odious to many soldiers. Later on, he calls Jesus the most powerful Being in the universe, though whether he was being facetious I could not tell. He also says that the lesson of the Crucifixion was one should not hurt people with connections, commenting that God should have crucified a bum and then made him His son, with the proclamation that no one should harm those in low places. The main character, who is not limited by the fourth dimension, travels back in time and validates Jesus' existence.
The book was anti-war. The main character is abducted by aliens who show him that everything that happens is supposed to happen, and is always simultaneously happening. People do not really die because they are still in existence in millions of other moments. The main character finds this is true as he travels between different moments of his life, over and over and over. Vonnegut uses this premise to superimpose war-related events, showing the horror of it and such.
The convoluted structure makes it hard to draw out the point of it all. I was mostly concerned with Vonnegut's religious commentary. He saw the Crucifixion as an unfortunate accident. What he did not take into account is ironic in light of his premise. From Genesis onward, God has been making known the fact that the Crucifixion was going to occur. He knew it was going to happen when He created the world. Within this is the conundrum expressed by Vonnegut's aliens. Everything that happens, God already knew was going to happen. He is sovereign over all events, and He is not limited by time. I think He sees the world as the aliens do- altogether, from beginning to end. As Jesus is God, Vonnegut's weak, shortsighted Jesus is quite the misunderstanding.
But Vonnegut was on the right track in his book. All are not limited by the constraints of time. There is One who isn't. He's just not an alien.
Vonnegut makes reference to Jesus throughout his book. Much of the action takes place during World War II, and so he makes the main character a chaplain's assistant and says Jesus's name was odious to many soldiers. Later on, he calls Jesus the most powerful Being in the universe, though whether he was being facetious I could not tell. He also says that the lesson of the Crucifixion was one should not hurt people with connections, commenting that God should have crucified a bum and then made him His son, with the proclamation that no one should harm those in low places. The main character, who is not limited by the fourth dimension, travels back in time and validates Jesus' existence.
The book was anti-war. The main character is abducted by aliens who show him that everything that happens is supposed to happen, and is always simultaneously happening. People do not really die because they are still in existence in millions of other moments. The main character finds this is true as he travels between different moments of his life, over and over and over. Vonnegut uses this premise to superimpose war-related events, showing the horror of it and such.
The convoluted structure makes it hard to draw out the point of it all. I was mostly concerned with Vonnegut's religious commentary. He saw the Crucifixion as an unfortunate accident. What he did not take into account is ironic in light of his premise. From Genesis onward, God has been making known the fact that the Crucifixion was going to occur. He knew it was going to happen when He created the world. Within this is the conundrum expressed by Vonnegut's aliens. Everything that happens, God already knew was going to happen. He is sovereign over all events, and He is not limited by time. I think He sees the world as the aliens do- altogether, from beginning to end. As Jesus is God, Vonnegut's weak, shortsighted Jesus is quite the misunderstanding.
But Vonnegut was on the right track in his book. All are not limited by the constraints of time. There is One who isn't. He's just not an alien.
Friday, April 01, 2005
Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
Frederick Douglass chronicles his journey from fatherless slave to self-sustained free individual in this autobiography. His discovery of his worth as a person was intriguing; the attitudes and obstacles he encountered and overcame rather amazing. He had profound points to make about the institution of slavery. And he did it all concisely. Brevity is a virtue, after all. Altogether, it was a very well-done piece.
I especially appreciated the Appendix. There, Douglass analyzes his presentation of Christianity throughout his book and definitively ascertains the mutual exclusiveness of the religion of the slaveholders and true Christianity.
It was a slim volume with important points to make. Douglass was a naturally intelligent person who helped to show the world that Aftrican-Americans are simply people with the same endowments and abilities as anyone else. In fact, I admired him so much, I wrote an essay on him and got second place in a contest. Douglass won me $100. I like him a lot.
I especially appreciated the Appendix. There, Douglass analyzes his presentation of Christianity throughout his book and definitively ascertains the mutual exclusiveness of the religion of the slaveholders and true Christianity.
It was a slim volume with important points to make. Douglass was a naturally intelligent person who helped to show the world that Aftrican-Americans are simply people with the same endowments and abilities as anyone else. In fact, I admired him so much, I wrote an essay on him and got second place in a contest. Douglass won me $100. I like him a lot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
