Jane Austen meets monsters, the Doctor meets the Muppets and other sources of amusement
"Somehow I think introducing you at breakfast tomorrow is going to be awkward. [...] I'm serious! What am I supposed to say - 'I found her lying naked on the lawn at midnight, can I keep her?'"
-- from Knife by RJ Anderson
Apparently the next in the Jane Austen meets the supernatural series is Mansfield Park and Mummies.
Sigh.
Admittedly, I can see mummies working better in Mansfield Park than I can imagine sea monsters working Sense and Sensibility... but on the best of days I don't find the supernatural particularly appealing, especially not when they're running rampant in Jane Austen. (Or the running rampant is Jane Austen. Because there's not only Mr Darcy, Vampyre, there's Jane Bites Back.) Personally, I think the idea of James Fairfax - which is (apparently) Emma but with same-sex marriages, and a James instead of a Jane Fairfax - is much more appealing. Maybe because those sorts of changes are subtle, which large monsters and supernatural forces tend not to be.
I like subtle.
(A passing thought: please don't tell me when someone writes Jane Eyre and Vampyres. Because there is a character in that referred to as a "vampyre" and to make her one in reality would not only infuriate me as a Jane Eyre and Bronte fan, but as a reader who quite liked Wide Sargasso Sea.... I'm inarticulate grr at the thought...)
I found out about all this latest "Fun with Jane" from this blog article, which also mentions a vague theory that the popularity of Austen's heroine's has more to do with their respective romantic heroes than the women themselves, and sparked a discussion about people's reactions to Austen's heroes and heroines, Fanny and Mansfield Park. I found it all interesting and thought-provoking. A part of me is sad I didn't get to write about Mansfield Park this year, because it would have been an interesting book to explore. I would have been curious to read any essays written by my classmates on the subject, too.
There was discussion of the Austen-and-monsters over tea, about how wouldn't the sea monsters have been a better fit in Persuasion? "What are they going to put in Persuasion?" I asked. "Persuasion and... what?"
"Persuasion and Pirates!"
Hmmm. Pirates are a little different to the undead. I might be interested in that.
I also found RJ Anderson's blog article on book banning, Sex, Violence and the Challenging of YA Books -- Is There A Double Standard? very thoughtful and thought-provoking. Book banning always seems like an alien culture to me - maybe because you very rarely hear about it happening here - and a bizarre, unnecessarily alien culture, too. I can see that there should be a forum for people to say "This shouldn't be in a children's school libray", but removing a book because there is some sort of group consensus that the book in question is inappropriate for a specific age group is different (in my eyes) from a book being removed because one individual demands it be so.
I'm not going to deny that books can influential - highly influential - in how readers think, and what they think, and what they think about. But banning books seems to be a band-aid solution. Isn't it better it equip young people with a strong foundation of values so that they can read books and establish what is right and wrong for themselves, than pretend that if they never encounter certain issues in fiction those issues won't be issues for them? Isn't it better to learn that some things from fiction instead of the hard way, from experience?
Learn from the mistakes of others because you don't have time to make them all yourself, after all.
* * *
I started watching the BBC adaptation of The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, something I've wanted to see since I was 13 and saw pictures from it in a book about the Brontës. I'm very taken with it so far - the soundtrack is unusual but works, it involves lots of picturesequeness (from scenery to costumes to and British accents, and it's faithful to the book. (Although I'm not being too particular in my comparison). Helen is portrayed perfectly. Arthur isn't always - I'm not sure if this is due to his limited screen time or the problems of being a child actor. Gilbert isn't quite how I imagine or perceive him, but part of that is because in the book, he is portrayed through his own words, mediated by his own perception of himself and his actions. But he is very convincing, very well acted, and I don't think it hurts that he has more of physical presence - it makes him more interesting. (I'm sort of in love with his accent.)
The mode of telling the story is different, making the adaptation more Helen's story than the novel is - the first part of the book is made up of letters written by Gilbert, whereas the adaptation has more scenes from Helen's perspective.
And then there's the not so small matter of that I love this story...
* * *
Knife, when I returned to reading it, was worth persevering with. I failed to think of Knife as being the same character as Bryony, but it wasn't a barrier to enjoying the book. Anderson does a really good job of portraying faeries as being other to humans - or rather, of portraying humans as being Other to faeries. The fearies don't feel as if they're just miniature humans with wings who live in a tree, but a unique species unto themselves. Furthermore, they're somewhere in between the cute pink fairies of children's picture books and the cruel, immortal faeries found in Tam Lin - they're neither childishly vapid or inhumanely malicious.
The story is a mixture of fantasy and mystery, with a bit of romance thrown in. It twists unexpectedly and explores some interesting issues concerning disabilities and relationships (friendship, familial relationships and those between ruler and subject). I grew to love the characters. While I wasn't so taken with the teenage boy, I think that's partly because he was a much more familiar figure. (Or maybe I've just had enough of teenage boys for the time being.) However, the "hero" who is recovering from an accident which has left him in a wheel chair is a fantastic touch.
I still think Knife is a terrible name (for a character), but it was a decent story; I liked it.
* * *
I kept running across references to The Muppet's Bohemian Rhapsody today. It's very amusing. Even more so when one looks up the original music video and sees how cleverly the Muppet's parodied it. I enjoyed the Muppet's interpretations (or rather, misinterpretations) of the lyrics, but my favourite part is Kermit's contribution at the end.
After watching it, my sister suggested I search for "The Muppet's Doctor Who" and I did. Which is how we found Doctor Who / The Muppet Show titles. LOVE SO MUCH.
(I think I just needed some S1/Ninth Doctor therapy. Methinks its time to watch those episodes again.)
Then I stumbled across Music of the Spheres. Personally I would have preferred to see The Doctor conduct an orchestra for an entire piece of music, rather than be interrupted by an annoying alien, but you know, that's just me, I just think orchestras are interesting.
Anyway. Moving on to more serious matters, there is apparently a national tertiary "results ban" affecting several universities, mine included. I still haven't worked out what it is exactly, but it seems that the union responsible has decided that banning the transmission of results from staff to the university is a good way to protest about something relating to treatment of staff. Unfortunately, the ban means its difficult for the university to transmit results to students, and so students become the innocent bystanders in this little game. I'm lucky, it really doesn't bother me if I get my results a week late. (Although like most people, I'm curious and not brilliant at waiting.) And possibly it'll all be over by the time results are released and not impact students at all.
BUT ISN'T THIS AN IMMATURE RESPONSE TO A SERIOUS ISSUE? REALLY? IT"S LIKE THROWING A TANTRUM! You won't do what I want, so ne-ne-ne, I'm going to be uncooperative and there's nothing you can do about it???
* * *
LibraryThing have a new feature. I get excited when LibraryThing introduce new features, but we've already established that I'm a bit obsessive-compulsive when it comes to reading, my reading record and my catalogue of books, so this shouldn't come as a surprise.
The new feature is to list whether or not books are available as ebooks, and where from. Actually, it will tell you where you can get a book from, including ebook editions.
But it'll also tell me which books in my catalogue are available as ebooks, and whether or not they're free. So I now have a way to reread The Day of the Triffids online if I desperately feel like it, which was surprise to discover. I was also surprised that Billabong books 1, 2, 6 and 7 are available on Project Gutenberg but not the others. Is there some significant reason for this?
While I'm going on about books again, I was in Target the other day, trying to find presents for cousins in the toy section. The toy section is next to the book section and I was surprised by how cheap some of the books were. $13 for Finnikin of the Rock? Very, very, insanely tempting. $11 for Dreaming of Amelia, the latest Ashbury High book by Jaclyn Moriarty (which I do want to read, despite most of it apparently taking place during a year 12 English exam)? I'm just not used to seeing YA novels for under, well, twenty I guess.
Namárië,
~ Herenya
currently reading: possibly Archer's Goon by Diana Wynne Jones
currently listening: "I'm not in love"
-- from Knife by RJ Anderson
Apparently the next in the Jane Austen meets the supernatural series is Mansfield Park and Mummies.
Sigh.
Admittedly, I can see mummies working better in Mansfield Park than I can imagine sea monsters working Sense and Sensibility... but on the best of days I don't find the supernatural particularly appealing, especially not when they're running rampant in Jane Austen. (Or the running rampant is Jane Austen. Because there's not only Mr Darcy, Vampyre, there's Jane Bites Back.) Personally, I think the idea of James Fairfax - which is (apparently) Emma but with same-sex marriages, and a James instead of a Jane Fairfax - is much more appealing. Maybe because those sorts of changes are subtle, which large monsters and supernatural forces tend not to be.
I like subtle.
(A passing thought: please don't tell me when someone writes Jane Eyre and Vampyres. Because there is a character in that referred to as a "vampyre" and to make her one in reality would not only infuriate me as a Jane Eyre and Bronte fan, but as a reader who quite liked Wide Sargasso Sea.... I'm inarticulate grr at the thought...)
I found out about all this latest "Fun with Jane" from this blog article, which also mentions a vague theory that the popularity of Austen's heroine's has more to do with their respective romantic heroes than the women themselves, and sparked a discussion about people's reactions to Austen's heroes and heroines, Fanny and Mansfield Park. I found it all interesting and thought-provoking. A part of me is sad I didn't get to write about Mansfield Park this year, because it would have been an interesting book to explore. I would have been curious to read any essays written by my classmates on the subject, too.
There was discussion of the Austen-and-monsters over tea, about how wouldn't the sea monsters have been a better fit in Persuasion? "What are they going to put in Persuasion?" I asked. "Persuasion and... what?"
"Persuasion and Pirates!"
Hmmm. Pirates are a little different to the undead. I might be interested in that.
I also found RJ Anderson's blog article on book banning, Sex, Violence and the Challenging of YA Books -- Is There A Double Standard? very thoughtful and thought-provoking. Book banning always seems like an alien culture to me - maybe because you very rarely hear about it happening here - and a bizarre, unnecessarily alien culture, too. I can see that there should be a forum for people to say "This shouldn't be in a children's school libray", but removing a book because there is some sort of group consensus that the book in question is inappropriate for a specific age group is different (in my eyes) from a book being removed because one individual demands it be so.
I'm not going to deny that books can influential - highly influential - in how readers think, and what they think, and what they think about. But banning books seems to be a band-aid solution. Isn't it better it equip young people with a strong foundation of values so that they can read books and establish what is right and wrong for themselves, than pretend that if they never encounter certain issues in fiction those issues won't be issues for them? Isn't it better to learn that some things from fiction instead of the hard way, from experience?
Learn from the mistakes of others because you don't have time to make them all yourself, after all.
* * *
I started watching the BBC adaptation of The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, something I've wanted to see since I was 13 and saw pictures from it in a book about the Brontës. I'm very taken with it so far - the soundtrack is unusual but works, it involves lots of picturesequeness (from scenery to costumes to and British accents, and it's faithful to the book. (Although I'm not being too particular in my comparison). Helen is portrayed perfectly. Arthur isn't always - I'm not sure if this is due to his limited screen time or the problems of being a child actor. Gilbert isn't quite how I imagine or perceive him, but part of that is because in the book, he is portrayed through his own words, mediated by his own perception of himself and his actions. But he is very convincing, very well acted, and I don't think it hurts that he has more of physical presence - it makes him more interesting. (I'm sort of in love with his accent.)
The mode of telling the story is different, making the adaptation more Helen's story than the novel is - the first part of the book is made up of letters written by Gilbert, whereas the adaptation has more scenes from Helen's perspective.
And then there's the not so small matter of that I love this story...
* * *
Knife, when I returned to reading it, was worth persevering with. I failed to think of Knife as being the same character as Bryony, but it wasn't a barrier to enjoying the book. Anderson does a really good job of portraying faeries as being other to humans - or rather, of portraying humans as being Other to faeries. The fearies don't feel as if they're just miniature humans with wings who live in a tree, but a unique species unto themselves. Furthermore, they're somewhere in between the cute pink fairies of children's picture books and the cruel, immortal faeries found in Tam Lin - they're neither childishly vapid or inhumanely malicious.
The story is a mixture of fantasy and mystery, with a bit of romance thrown in. It twists unexpectedly and explores some interesting issues concerning disabilities and relationships (friendship, familial relationships and those between ruler and subject). I grew to love the characters. While I wasn't so taken with the teenage boy, I think that's partly because he was a much more familiar figure. (Or maybe I've just had enough of teenage boys for the time being.) However, the "hero" who is recovering from an accident which has left him in a wheel chair is a fantastic touch.
I still think Knife is a terrible name (for a character), but it was a decent story; I liked it.
* * *
I kept running across references to The Muppet's Bohemian Rhapsody today. It's very amusing. Even more so when one looks up the original music video and sees how cleverly the Muppet's parodied it. I enjoyed the Muppet's interpretations (or rather, misinterpretations) of the lyrics, but my favourite part is Kermit's contribution at the end.
After watching it, my sister suggested I search for "The Muppet's Doctor Who" and I did. Which is how we found Doctor Who / The Muppet Show titles. LOVE SO MUCH.
(I think I just needed some S1/Ninth Doctor therapy. Methinks its time to watch those episodes again.)
Then I stumbled across Music of the Spheres. Personally I would have preferred to see The Doctor conduct an orchestra for an entire piece of music, rather than be interrupted by an annoying alien, but you know, that's just me, I just think orchestras are interesting.
Anyway. Moving on to more serious matters, there is apparently a national tertiary "results ban" affecting several universities, mine included. I still haven't worked out what it is exactly, but it seems that the union responsible has decided that banning the transmission of results from staff to the university is a good way to protest about something relating to treatment of staff. Unfortunately, the ban means its difficult for the university to transmit results to students, and so students become the innocent bystanders in this little game. I'm lucky, it really doesn't bother me if I get my results a week late. (Although like most people, I'm curious and not brilliant at waiting.) And possibly it'll all be over by the time results are released and not impact students at all.
BUT ISN'T THIS AN IMMATURE RESPONSE TO A SERIOUS ISSUE? REALLY? IT"S LIKE THROWING A TANTRUM! You won't do what I want, so ne-ne-ne, I'm going to be uncooperative and there's nothing you can do about it???
* * *
LibraryThing have a new feature. I get excited when LibraryThing introduce new features, but we've already established that I'm a bit obsessive-compulsive when it comes to reading, my reading record and my catalogue of books, so this shouldn't come as a surprise.
The new feature is to list whether or not books are available as ebooks, and where from. Actually, it will tell you where you can get a book from, including ebook editions.
But it'll also tell me which books in my catalogue are available as ebooks, and whether or not they're free. So I now have a way to reread The Day of the Triffids online if I desperately feel like it, which was surprise to discover. I was also surprised that Billabong books 1, 2, 6 and 7 are available on Project Gutenberg but not the others. Is there some significant reason for this?
While I'm going on about books again, I was in Target the other day, trying to find presents for cousins in the toy section. The toy section is next to the book section and I was surprised by how cheap some of the books were. $13 for Finnikin of the Rock? Very, very, insanely tempting. $11 for Dreaming of Amelia, the latest Ashbury High book by Jaclyn Moriarty (which I do want to read, despite most of it apparently taking place during a year 12 English exam)? I'm just not used to seeing YA novels for under, well, twenty I guess.
Namárië,
~ Herenya
currently reading: possibly Archer's Goon by Diana Wynne Jones
currently listening: "I'm not in love"