Catching Up on Down Time

Right now Mike is watching some UFC fighting. There is a man with his chest hair shaved into the shape of an arrow punching the crap out of another man. One could call it a Hairrow. Ha. I kill me.  Here's a picture:

Is this what men think is cool? Does this guy think the Hairrow (I kind of want to copyright that word) will make him seem tougher? Does he think it will get him laid? I mean, I'm sure he's a decent person, and he basically was kicking the other guy's butt, but still.  Boys are weird.

Meanwhile, while my husband watches the gladiators punch, kick and choke each other in a blood-stained arena, I figured I'd stop by to say that I have made absolutely no progress and I have basically resigned myself to not finishing my book club book. Book club is on Sunday and I'm only 25 pages into Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, by Robert M. Pirsig. 

I'll admit that I started the book with a bit of a bad attitude.  I just wasn't in the mood for it, and it seemed like it was going to be an effort to read. It's summer, and I'm pretty stressed out about work and some other personal things happening in my life. I didn't feel like reading a great philosophical memoir. 

I will try to read some more of it before Sunday, and I'll look up some stuff for conversation, but I just don't have the energy for this right now.


Usually I love what our group chooses to read, and I love how we pick things. Normally, everyone brings suggestions about what they want to read, and we vote. The past few reads have been more difficult, intellectual books. Normally, this is something I like. Especially when its with a group of people I like and respect so much. I get so much out of our discussions.

But it's summer! I need a beach read. I need to get lost. I think that's why I enjoyed the 50 Shades of Grey books - there was nothing to think about, just a place to get lost. An escape. A fantasy so far removed from work and stress. I need that. Having said that, I am having a difficult time coming up with fun, light books to suggest that would also allow us to have a good discussion.  Anyone who happens upon this blog in the next day or so, please give me some suggestions!

As a matter of housekeeping, I'm going to finally delete that post-it on my desktop that has the list of all the books I've read since last October. It's clear I'm never going to get around to writing reviews of all of them. And even if I ever did, too much time has passed and I won't remember anything more than general impressions and feelings anyway. So I've decided to just make some notations on here and on Goodreads, and move on. Every time I open my computer, that list judges and mocks me.

So Book Club will be the highlight of my weekend. I've got to work tomorrow - that's three weekends in a row. It's exhausting and overwhelming, and I'm so tired lately. BUT, there are some fun things on the horizon too.  First, I'm going to Las Vegas with all the girls at work next weekend. Our boss has a house there, and his wife has invited us all for a weekend of fun and sun. I am really looking forward to a weekend by a pool. Second, my husband and I are planning on taking a road trip to Colorado in a couple weekends to my family reunion. I haven't seen a lot of those people in YEARS. I am super excited about this trip! 

So, just to wrap up a random and mostly non-bookish post, here is the list of books on my virtual post-it note, that I am going to purge from my desktop. Tell me if you've read any of these:

1. P.S. I love You - 2011 (not as good as the movie)

2. Dirty Secret - 2011 (A memoir about hoarding? Yes please.)

3. Amaryllis in Blueberry - 2011 (Not that good. Apparently I should have read The Poisonwood Bible instead.)

4. The Gurnsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society - 2011 (cute story told through letters.)

5. Sex with the Queen - 2011 (Not as interesting as Sex with Kings - and not just because I prefer dudes)

6. Sex with Kings - 2011 (Very interesting book about the politics involved in being the King's mistress)

7. The Bell Jar - 2011 (I really enjoyed this, and not just because of my morbid interest in Sylvia Plath's suicide. It's the best thing I've ever read about a descent into mental illness. Most interesting is how I totally identified with the protagonist, feeling what she felt - confusion as to why others couldn't understand what it was like to be her. Ok, I apparently still have a lot to say about this. Maybe I'll write an actual post.)

8. You Don't Look Like Anyone I know - 2011 (GREAT memoir about a woman with a condition that makes her unable to recognize people's faces - like the kind where she didn't recognize her mother or her husband. Fascinating.)

9. The Help - 2011 (Brilliant. Fun. Good movie too.)

10. Wicked - 2011 (It could be because I listened to this on audio (the reader was very difficult to listen to), but I was bored to tears. It took me a LONG time to get through this one. (Do you like the parentheses within the parentheses?))

11. Lolita - 2011 (This, I think I enjoyed more because it was on audio and read by Jeremy Irons. Fun fact: Jeremy Irons is the voice of Scar in The Lion King. So then I pictured Scar reading Lolita to me, and it was awesome. Jeremy Irons's voice is perfect for Humbert Humbert.) 

12. The Family Fang - 2011 (FANTASTIC! Read this immediately if you haven't. I won this from my participation in #FridayReads on Twitter, and it's the best gift I got last year.)

13. One Hundred Years of Solitude - 2012 (I liked this much more AFTER I discussed it win my Book Club.)

14. The Tudors - 2012 (I always like reading books about The Tudors, and I appreciated how this author was careful not to treat the Tudor family like they are gods. He's right in saying that too often history casts them as great leaders (mostly Henry VIII and Elizabeth I) - they were both selfish tyrants, and they both got their country into a boatload of debt. But my appreciation for this waned as I read through the book - he gets a little to aggressively anti-Tudor, and I didn't appreciate that. It's a non-fiction book, and I appreciate a point of view, but not an agenda.)

15. The Memory Keeper's Daughter - 2012 (I loved the themes of forgetting and forgiving throughout this book. Word images brilliant enough to rival the photographs described.)

16. Norwegian Wood - 2012 (REALLY liked this book club pick. Must. Read. More. Murakami.)

17. Her Husband - 2012 (It was kind of dumb of me to read a book about Ted Hughes when all I am really interested in is the tidbits about Sylvia Plath. Therefore I blame myself for the fact that I found this book very boring. 

Find me on Goodreads if you haven't already!

The Chelsea Handler Christmas

Hello! And Happy New Year!

I had a wonderful Holiday week in New York. More on that below. First I'd like to talk about the three fun books I read over my week in New York. This is, after all, a book blog.

Introduction:

I am a Chelsea Handler fan. For some reason during law school, I stopped watching her show (probably because I got really busy and serious, and there was no time for frivolity in my life - especially once I was on Law Review), but I have always enjoyed her writing.

Now that I've read all of her books (I read My Horizontal Life and Are you There Vodka, It's Me Chelsea quite awhile ago), as well as a book by Heather McDonald, I totally feel like I am friends with all of Chelsea's crew. I have a lot in common with all of them - I pee my pants occasionally when things are really funny. I also like margaritas and tropical vacations. So you see, I would fit right in.

However, I'm not quite sure I could handle all the shenanigans they get into. I am extremely gullible, and I would fall for every lie Chelsea would tell me. I am also a terrible liar, so I could never get revenge by playing practical jokes on anyone else. This is still part of my pitch for them to invite me to parties.

Anyways, I read the following three books last week (which is kind of a record for me), and I enjoyed each of them immensely - mostly because I didn't have to think; I could just laugh. And I did. To myself. On the couch while everyone else in the room thought I was a weirdo. Now that I think about it, that's not an uncommon occurrence.

Chelsea Chelsea Bang Bang

By Chelsea Handler

I guess there's not a lot to say about this book of essays other than they are great if you're a fan of Chelsea. She's not afraid to tell you embarrassing stories for a laugh. But it's not the kind of shallow or minimal revealing that you normally expect from celebrities who write memoir-type books. She really does let the reader into her life, and she makes no apology for her behavior. She is who she is. And what she is is hilarious.

There are stories from her childhood - about her father, her sisters and brothers - and about a friend who introduced her to "the feeling." Just read it. There are stories about her friends and her ex and let me be honest: I don't think I could date her. As I stated above, I'm really gullible, and she pulled some serious crap on him. He must have had the patience of Job. But, she's hilarious and fun, so that probably balances things out.

But more than just the stories she tells, I love the way Chelsea writes (yeah, I can call her by her first name). Her use of language is good, and whenever you think you know where the sentence is going, you don't. She not only knows how to tell a story, she can actually write.

Of course, if you're looking for substance or for intellectuality, you won't find it. This is a fun book - the type you can read in an afternoon. But that doesn't mean it's not smart. Enjoy!

Lies Chelsea Handler Told Me

By Chelsea's Family, Friends and Other Victims

In case you didn't know this, Chelsea loves to tell lies for the sake of laughs, and nothing makes her laugh harder than seeing her friends miserable. Paradoxically, each writer in this book will tell you that Chelsea values honesty and truthfulness over all else. She will lie to you, mock you, torture you and make you extremely uncomfortable, but only if she truly cares about you. And once she's your friend, there's no one more loyal (while she's plotting against you, of course).

Each chapter in this book is written by a family member, friend, or co-worker that has suffered as a result of Chelsea Handler's lies. Of course there are great stories from her family - stuff she pulled on them, even when she was in grade school. There are funnier stories from her current set of friends - most of whom write for or work for her show in some other capacity.

Some of the contributors tell just one big, long, torturous story about how badly they were tricked by Chelsea. Others tell a series of little lies Chelsea's told. Sometimes Chelsea tells a lie and then forgets about it, without realizing how her lie tortures her victim.

Once you read this book, you will be grateful for your work environment. Or maybe not. Maybe you would rather work in a place where you can never leave your computer unlocked, where you absolutely can never trust anything a co-worker tells you, and where practical jokes are waiting around every corner.

Again, there's not a lot of intellectual stimulation to be found here, but it's a great book for an airplane or to read a chapter here and there in waiting rooms or during your lunch hour.

You'll Never Blue Ball in This Town Again

By Heather McDonald

I rather enjoyed Heather's chapter in the Lies Chelsea Told Me book, so I had high expectations for this book. Heather is a funny writer. She's also a funny girl. It's just that she's got a different writing style than Chelsea, that's not always quite as LOL funny.

The premise for this book is that Heather was a virgin until she was 27. In Hollywood! While trying to make it as a comic and a writer! This is the story of how she eventually lost her virginity and met the man of her dreams, who eventually became her husband. It's a modern day love story - with a lot of dry humping.

Heather's choices for the stories to tell about men she dated are great - all of the men are different, but none are total cliches, which I kind of expected. None are totally one-dimensional, and Heather is honest about her mistakes and her naivete. I was instantly hooked with the title of the first chapter: "Can't a Girl Dress Like a Hooker, Dance like a Stripper and Kiss Like a Porn Star and Still be a Nineteen-Year-Old Virgin?"

Her humor isn't as in-your-face as Chelsea, but sometimes I prefer things a little more subdued. This is another great book for an airplane or an afternoon at home with a cup of tea and box of cookies.

Alright, now we can move on to other stuff that happened over Christmas.

Christmas Break:

We flew in on Christmas Eve and went to dinner with Mike's mom and her boyfriend. It was delicious. Christmas Day we got up, had a delicious breakfast cooked by Mike's Aunts and opened gifts. I was full. Then all of Mike's family came over as well as some of our sister-in-law's family. We had a HUGE meal, and a ton of dessert. Then more gifts. Also, I kind of drank a lot of wine and some champagne. Therefore, I spent the day after Christmas with a big hangover. Luckily, I had books to get me through it.

I saw my friend Tara, and that was really fun - even though all we did was hang out at her house and make cupcakes. We also took a day and went into the city, and we even brought the baby. Afterwards, we had a nice dinner at Mike's Great Aunt's house. Mostly it was just a really great time, visiting with family. And eating.

I ate a literal ton of food. Ok, not a literal ton, since I only gained 6 pounds, but it felt like it. Do you like how I phrased that? "only gained 6 pounds." Like it's an accomplishment to gain less than 10 pounds on a trip to New York - especially over the holidays. But actually, it kind of is. So what? It's a new year, and with that comes new resolve to get healthier and stay that way.

To that end, Mike and his family (and me, of course) have started a blog together to track our weight loss attempt this year. It's a private blog - just for us, so there's no link here, but I wanted to tell you about the idea, because I am kind of excited about it. Participating in the challenge are Mike's two aunts, and his brother and wife. That's a total of 6 people. The challenge is simple: lose as much weight as possible and get healthy. For each pound lost, $10 is contributed to a communal pot. We pay for Mike's aunts' weight loss, they pay for Mike's brother and his wife's, who in turn pay for ours. That way everyone is accountable. At the end of the year, we'll use the money to go on a trip together, where we can all take pictures of our new bodies. I can't wait. I'll be keeping track of my progress here throughout the year too, so stay tuned.

We also spent a lot of time with our adorable little niece over our trip. Here are some pictures for your viewing pleasure, since I know you're dying to see them:

The Typewriter is Holy

As you know (since I've said it 300 times), my wonderful husband took us to San Francisco as a celebratory trip for our seventh anniversary. It was awesome. One of the highlights for me, of course, was our trip to the City Lights bookstore. The store is famous for its publishing and its politics. It is three floors of gloriousness (still less than Powell's in Portland, but impressive nonetheless). This is my husband standing outside the door waiting for me to get pictures and get over the idea of being at the store enough to actually go inside.


Before going to this store, I had only a vague notion of The Beat Generation. I knew it included Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg, and they did drugs, traveled and wrote poetry and books. I saw the movie Howl, which gave me a bit more of an idea, but it was still pretty fuzzy. I majored in English in undergrad, but I think the only stuff I read by any of The Beats was a poem or two in a survey course. The point is that when we walked into City Lights, I knew it was a big deal, but I didn't know how much or exactly why. So, my goal was to find a book there that would tell me more, and I did indeed find such a book - on the third floor in the poetry room.


The Typewriter is Holy

By Bill Morgan

The author of this book is Bill Morgan. He is a friend and the personal archivist for Allen Ginsberg. He has made a life documenting Ginsberg's life and career. He noticed throughout his research that there are biographies and books on all The Beats separately, but there was not a book that told the story of The Beat Generation as a whole, and there was nothing that put all of their stories together in one place. Now we have it.

This makes it the perfect book for someone (like me) who knows very little about The Beats as a whole - even after reading the book, I'm not sure whether I should be calling them "The Beats," or if I should be typing out "The Beat Generation" every time.

The Irritating:

I will quickly start off with the two major flaws I found with this biographical retelling, and then get on with the good and interesting things about this book. The most irritating thing about this novel is that the author is inconsistent with names. There is a HUGE cast of characters, and it's nearly impossible to keep everyone straight. For example, it took me a long time to figure out that Bill = William S. Burroughs, but sometimes the author also called him Burroughs, and at other times just William, and still other times, he used the whole name. A good editor would have fixed this problem right away.

The other flaw with this biography, in my opinion, is the overwhelming bias towards Allen Ginsberg. The author is clear in the Introduction about his relationship with Ginsberg, so it shouldn't have been surprising that he says mostly favorable things about Ginsberg when so many of the other Beats were described as careless, shallow, self-indulgent people. Some of Ginsberg's faults are stated quickly, but they are not dwelt on like Neal Cassady's womanizing or William S. Burroughs's drug dependency. That takes away some of my belief in the author's version of events. Since the author was upfront about things, this may be forgivable. Nevertheless, it bothered me, and it made me want to seek out other biographies on The Beats, just for clarity.

The Good:

There is a core group of people that make up The Beat Generation: Allen Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac, William S. Burroughs, and Neal Cassady are kind of the 4 central characters, but there are a lot of other names that come and go. This author's thesis is that The Beat Generation would not have happened the way it did without Allen Ginsberg's knack for introducing people, encouraging them to write, promoting their work to his (and every other) publisher, and his ability to keep them all in contact with each other on a surprisingly regular basis. Ginsberg's apartment - whether in New York or San Francisco - was often the place where people gathered, stayed, slept, lived, etc. It was also often the place where the group experimented with drugs, and where groups of people would work together writing, editing and refining books of poetry or stories.

The core group met in New York, and branched out from there: Kerouac traveling across the US on many occasions, Burroughs living overseas mostly (Mexico City and then Tangier), Cassady traveling across the US and Mexico with Jack, his wife, other women, etc. But they all wrote each other a lot, and therefore, it's easy to document their movements and what each was doing while the rest were writing elsewhere.

Their story is extremely interesting and compelling. There is no denying that the works of literature and poetry that this group contributed to the world is amazing and worthy of attention. Social boundaries were pushed and broken. But the stories of these men are kind of sad - there is so much tragedy that follows each of them, and most of them ended their lives, penniless and alone. But great art often comes from such events, and that's what they gave us - great art.

The Takeaway:

Or so I'm told. I've never actually read much of the work written by The Beats. I'm not generally a big fan of poetry (I'm either too stupid or too lazy for it), so I probably won't be pouring over Howl or any of Ginsberg's other poetry. However, this book did give me a list of a few books I should probably read:


On the Road, by Jack Kerouac. This is a largely biographical story of Kerouac's travels with Neal Cassady, and it was the book that made The Beats famous. It was not Kerouac's favorite, though, and he struggled with the fame it brought him, not only because of the attention, but also because it wasn't always positive attention and praise. This fame was his ultimate downfall. This makes me curious.



Junkie by William Burroughs. It tells the story of a man's decline into addiction - something with which Burroughs struggled his entire life. It wasn't published initially because publishers didn't want to glorify addiction or even talk about it at all. That's something better left under the rug. Heaven forbid we have a conversation about addiction or try to understand addicts.



I also have a book called Kerouac, A Biography, by Ann Charters. I've had it awhile, but I think it might be about time to read it. From what I read in The Typewriter is Holy, I think that Kerouac's story is one of the most tragic, and I'd like to know more about him.


Have you read anything about The Beats? Have you read any of their work? I think I'm more interested in the movement as a whole, and its impact on the literary community, but I'm always open to suggestions of what to read.

A Jane Austen Education

It's Christmas. So nice to have the music and the smells and the great movies on TV. I especially enjoy some of these:



They only come out at Christmas time. I always try to stock up, but I usually eat through my supply by February and then I'm left to suffer without Mint M&Ms for nearly 9 months. It's a tragedy, I know.

I'm also excited about all the Holiday baking I'll get to do. Our office Holiday party is Wednesday, and I'm planning to bring my famous Cranberry Bread - if you're good, I'll do a post on it and all of its glory. I also want to make some good Christmas cookies - maybe some of my mom's glorious Cream Cheese Flakes and maybe some old fashioned Sugar Cookies. Luckily, it's cold out, so giant sweaters and sweatshirts are totally acceptable.

Also, the holidays mean lots of reading under blankets (in theory), so maybe I should just get to talking about books. (Disclaimer: I read this book in September sometime. Don't judge. Or do, but take the below lessons into consideration.)

A Jane Austen Education

By: William Deresiewicz

I loved this book before I ever opened it. The rest of the title tells you everything you need to know: "How Six Novels Taught Me About Love, Friendship, and the Things that Really Matter."

Of course you know I'm a big Jane Austen fan. Of course you can guess that I've read all of her novels at least once and a few of them have been read several times. And we know the message from The Jane Austen Book Club - using Jane's novels as a rulebook is not a bad way to fumble our way through life. Really, what WOULD Jane do?

But William Deresiewicz takes things a bit further than that simple mantra. The lessons he learned were (no spoilers here, because these things are written on the back of the book):

1. EMMA - Everyday events (especially the ones that seem mundane and meaningless) are the things that really matter in life.

2. PRIDE AND PREJUDICE - You aren't perfect, but making mistakes is the only way to grow up and to find out who you really are.

3. NORTHANGER ABBEY - Stay awake; don't take things for granted. By opening yourself to new experiences, you can turn your life into an adventure that will never end.

4. MANSFIELD PARK - Being entertained is not the same thing as being happy. Perpetual amusement leads only to the perpetual threat of boredom.

5. PERSUASION - Be honest with your friends. Unconditional acceptance is not real friendship. A true friend points out your mistakes - even at the risk of losing your friendship.

6. SENSE AND SENSIBILITY - Love is about growing up, not staying young. A true lover is someone who is different from you and is willing to challenge you. It means a never-ending clash of opinions and perspectives.

So, why would you want to read the book, when I've just laid out all the lessons for you? Well, for one thing, the author spends a considerable amount of time with the text of each novel - analyzing the events, language and characters to draw his conclusions. It's scholarly and intellectual, but it's relatable because it's also a memoir. He tells us the story of his life as a student before, during and after the discovery of Jane's works - how he matured and grew up. I'm still working on the maturity thing, but I found myself relating to the different milestones in his life.

I will say that having read all the Jane Austen novels beforehand made this book a lot easier to read and understand. However, don't be afraid to pick this up if you have only read a couple of her novels, or even none. He explains some of the more important plot points and the relationships of the characters so that it would be easy for anyone to follow along. And it's extremely likely that reading his thoughts on the novels will make you want to read the ones you haven't yet read.

Reading his points on some of the novels, specifically Persuasion, made me want to go back and reread it. Persuasion has been one of my least favorite Jane Austen novels (I usually put it at 5 out of 6), but now I'm willing to go back and give it another chance. Conversely, even after his remarks, I am not ready to reread Emma (number 6 out of 6). I can appreciate the lessons he learned without going back to that one.

Overall, this was an interesting, entertaining and educational read - the perfect combination. I would definitely recommend this to any Jane fan, and to anyone who wonders if he could be a fan of Jane and her work.

Addition After the Fact:

I forgot to add in this fun little fact: Did you know that Rudyard Kipling wrote a book called "The Janeites" about Austen worship in the trenches of World War I? How crazy is that? Long before loving Jane Austen was mainstream (have you seen the millions of Jane Austen spin-off books?), people - ok not just ANY people, Rudyard Kipling for crying out loud! - were writing about the cult of Jane Austen love. This book is going right at the top of my list of books to read immediately.

Frankenstein and A Confederacy of Dunces

Have I ever told you how awesome my book club is? Well, they are. It's a group of people from law school that I initially lured into the group by offering booze and snacks, and they keep coming for the same reason(I presume). Here's an old picture of the group - some of these people don't come anymore, and there are a couple of new members, but you get the general idea. I'm going to have to remember to take a new picture at every meeting.


We've met twice in the last few months, and read two really interesting books.

A Confederacy of Dunces

By John Kennedy Toole

This meeting was quite awhile ago, and I read a library copy of the book, so I don't have much to go on other than my memory. The general plot of the book follows Ignatius J. Reilly through some "adventures." Ignatius is a bit off - really intelligent, but socially inept. The book is basically a series of unfortunate events, and through it all, Ignatius continues to declare his intellectual superiority, while being unable to see what an utter failure he is. He expects everyone to do things for him - especially his mom.

There are a lot more absurd things and weirdness, but here are the things I remember most from my reading and from our discussion:

The Language

The language was so great. There was a lot of alliteration and interesting phrasing. Each character had his/her own linguistic tics and unique phraseology. I loved how the author used language to help create the characters and to set each scene. I remember on several occasions making notes about the use of language even though I didn't like what was happening in general.

Each reader sees what they want

At the beginning of our discussion, we all felt pretty blah about the book. It was interesting, I guess, and we all liked bits and pieces, and we were generally glad to have read a book that has gotten so much attention over the years. But we felt like it lacked an actual plot and I personally felt like I didn't quite get what the author was getting at. This feeling conflicted with reports we'd all read about how genius the book is and how it's the best book ever, and how our lives would only be complete after reading it.

But after an hour or so of conversation, Professor Leary (our former faculty adviser, who so generously still shows up and helps make the discussion coherent and dazzles us with her brilliant insights) says: "maybe this book is genius in that it brings out something different in each person." As soon as she said it, we all realized it was true. I was especially interested in the relationship between Ignatius and his mother. Others focused on the psychological aspects of the character and what made him the way he is. Others honed in on Ignatius's attempts at social reform, and what statement the author might be making about society in general.

So, I'm really glad I read this book, but I'm even more glad that I read this with this group of people. Some books are so much better with a discussion, and this is one of those books.

Frankenstein

By Mary Shelley

This is my third time with this novel, so obviously I like it. Even so, I still forgot so much about the plot that it still felt fresh for me.

Things I forgot: 1) Frankenstein is the name of the creator, not the monster; 2) the story is told to the reader by a ship captain (on a mission to sail across the North Pole), who was told the story by Dr. Frankenstein himself; 3) How caught up in himself the creator is that he can't see how things will unfold - his selfishness really stood out to me this time around.

The plot is fairly simple: doctor becomes obsessed with the idea of reanimating the dead and creating life from nothing. He slaves away, forsaking his family and friends to focus solely on his project without one thought to the potential consequences (well, the potential bad consequences - he thinks about the potential glory a lot). When he was confronted with the reality of his actions, he abandons everything, flees and tries to forget - but he can't. He'll be haunted by his actions for the rest of his life.

There is so much to say about this novel - thousands of papers have been written on it - but my focus during this read was on the author of the novel: Mary Shelley. What a life she had! Her mother was Mary Wollstonecraft was a famous Feminist (she wrote A Vindication of the Rights of Woman). Her father was a writer too - on politics, and he was a friend, benefactor, and later a sponge off of several poets and other literary players of the time. Mary grew up with the likes of Samuel Taylor Colridge reciting their work in her living room.

This is how she met Percy Shelley, one of the most celebrated of the Romantic Poets. They had a tumultuous relationship - one that started while Percy was still married to another woman. His first wife granted him a divorce when Mary became pregnant so that he could marry Mary and make sure that his new child was not born a bastard.

Mary and Percy were always in debt, and Percy was often in danger of being put into debtor's prison. When those serious times rolled around, he left Mary to hide out elsewhere, and she would have to sit home (often pregnant) and wait for the officers to knock on her door looking for Percy. She never quite got over the feeling of abandonment and exile she felt during those years. Abandonment is one of the great themes of the novel - the need for companionship and nurturing is one of the most basic human needs.

Meanwhile, Mary was reading everything she could, and she began making attempts to write stories and poetry. During one particularly lucrative time in their lives, the Shelleys met up with their friend, Lord Byron, and rented a cottage on a lake in Italy. It was here that the dare was issued: each person (Shelley, Byron and Mary) would have to write a ghost story to tell to the others the next night. Shelley and Byron both made feeble attempts, but Mary didn't let the idea go. She laid awake many nights trying to think of how best to tell the story. Frankenstein took many months to perfect, but perfect it she did.

Mary and Percy were together for about 7 years when Percy died (another abandonment). After giving birth to 4 children, only one of them was still alive when Percy died. Mary regularly visited Percy's grave, often reading Milton's "Paradise Lost," crying and mourning her lost husband. She continued to write, and she was fairly successful, but nothing has outlasted her masterpiece - her own creation, Frankenstein.

Child of Light

By Muriel Spark

I read bits and pieces of this biography as a supplement to the novel. It's fairly comprehensive, and is clearly well-researched, but it is also dry and not very compelling. There MUST be a better biography out there! Mary Shelley's life was very dramatic - it shouldn't be difficult to tell her story in a compelling and page-turning way. Right?

If you have never read Frankenstein, I would encourage you to do so. The first few chapters are a little bit dry, but all in all, the story of Frankenstein's monster is surprisingly human - full of the love, fear and misunderstanding that are so prevalent in human nature. There is so much more to discuss - not the least of which are the many feminist issues within the text - and I could go on and on, but this seems like enough for now. Please leave a comment if you have input. I'd love to continue the discussion.

Every book we read as a group is so much better than when I read it on my own. Our discussions are so enlightening and every time I'm sure I have things figured out, someone else thought of it in a different way and my eyes are opened. Jane Austen's advice to living a full and satisfying life is to surround yourself with people who you admire, people you look up to and from whom you can learn things. I believe in my book group I have found just that - a group of people I admire and from whom I learn things at every meeting. Thanks, everyone!

The Bell Jar

Today is an awesome day because I got the new Bookmarks Magazine! It's also a sad day, because it's the last one of the year. It is convenient, though, because it comes early enough to pick goodies out of it for my Christmas list! I'm also excited to read the lists of books about Careers. All I can think about is waiting on bar results, so I'm interested to see what books they have listed under "Attorney." And in case I fail, I'll have to check other career option too. :)

On a more somber note, I'd like to talk a little bit about my most recent read, "The Bell Jar." I've read just enough about the life of Sylvia Plath to know that this is a very autobiographical novel. Which is what makes it so amazing and so heartbreaking.

The novel, of course, is the story of Esther Greenwood, a bright, beautiful and blooming talent, and her descent into mental illness and her attempt to live a productive life in spite of her obstacles. It opens with her in New York, working for a magazine - a position that she won by way of a brilliantly written application. In fact, Esther tells us, writing and winning scholarships is the one thing she's good at. But Esther feels lost and uncertain and alone. Once home, she continues slipping into a depression so consuming that she eventually attempts suicide. She is, however, miraculously discovered at the moment before death. Because she is a famous local author and poet, her suicide attempt and hospitalization is widely publicized. Through this embarrassing invasion, Esther gains the patronage and support of an understanding and compassionate rich woman who promises to fund Esther's recovery in return for Esther's promise to try to heal, and with the hope that Esther will return to school once she is recovered.

The language of this novel is beautiful and poetic, but not over the top. Plath knows how to create imagery and evoke emotion using minimal, but impactful language. What is most amazing about the language is that it retells the novel's events in a way that the reader takes the trip right along with Esther. This is not a story of what happened to some woman - it's not as distant as that. I wouldn't go so far as to say that I felt everything Esther felt, but I did empathize and I did understand what she felt like - at every step of the way.

Plath's brilliance isn't in writing a moving novel of an extraordinary woman's trip to the depths of despair and back up again, although that's what she did. Her brilliance is in making Esther not seem crazy. Esther did some crazy things - throwing all her clothes out of the window of her New York apartment, for example. But even those moments which, from a distance, seem irrational, seem and feel like the only rational choice - both to Esther and to the reader.

Everything Esther does seems and feels logical and smart. I was surprised when her mother wondered why Esther couldn't get out of bed or why Esther didn't want to take a stenography course. It seemed obvious to me. I totally sympathized with Esther when she wanted to explain how she felt to someone, but it just seemed like too much work - it was easier to let them come to their own conclusions, because even if she tried to explain, she probably couldn't articulate it anyway. I do this fairly often in my own life. Esther's fears about sex and the pressure she felt because of her immense talent were a terrible burden - why couldn't everyone else understand? I understood even though I do not have a great talent. I understood because Sylvia Plath made me understand.

As if all of this weren't amazing enough, if we think about Sylvia as Esther, the accomplishment of this novel stands out even more. This is not a novel written by a psychologist or a therapist; it isn't written by someone who is trying to explain something using clinical terms or common symptomology. This is a novel written by someone who struggled with depression her whole life, and it is written about a particularly difficult time in that bleak life. While in theory it is not surprising that a poet could write well about something with which she is well acquainted, the amazing part is how she was able to write so clearly and with such objectivity. She doesn't get mired down in self-pity or whining. Her ability to separate from herself, and to observe and explain that time of her life with such a strong voice is nothing short of miraculous.

I was afraid this novel would be really dark and gloomy, but it's not. It's perfectly readable, with language that is poetic, but not oppressive. Sometimes, because Esther's mind is so fuzzy - being so uncertain about everything - the novel gets a little fuzzy and dreamlike, but this is only evidence of the brilliance of a writer that uses language to mimic her protagonist's mindset. At other times, the scenes are so vivid and sharply written that they actually hurt to read.

Again, I only know enough about Sylvia Plath to know that "The Bell Jar" is basically a true story. Which makes me want to know more about her. I have begun reading "Her Husband" which is a biography of Ted Hughes that is centered around his marriage to and relationship with Plath. I've also added a couple of Sylvia Plath biographies to my TBR list.

I am not a fan of poetry (either because I'm not smart enough OR because I'm too lazy), so I doubt I'll spend much time reading Plath's poetry - her main claim to fame other than her eventual suicide. But I would like to read some books that talk about her poetry and what it meant to her and to Hughes. What a shame that so brilliant a mind is no longer producing great literature.

Great and Bountiful Weekend!

In the past couple of weeks, I've written and erased three different posts. They were all complicated, and with lots of feelings and ideas of what kind of blogger I want to be, etc. But in the end, there's no need to figure out what kind of blog I want this to be - I just need to do it. Also, there's no need to label it. I just need to do what I want to do. And that's that. I can't believe I even wrote a whole paragraph on that. Let's get on to the fun stuff.


A couple of days ago, we got two packages in the mail. One was from Mike's aunts, and included the goodies in the picture above. Baking mixes, cookie cutters, sprinkles, etc. Also two caramel corn treats molded into the shape of a corn cob. How much is that going to hurt my teeth? I'll let you know.

On the same day, I got an amazing birthday package from my mom. She already bought me a purse and shoes, but she said she just wanted to send me a box full of little things that made her think of me. She's awesome, and thoughtful and everything nice.

When I was little, I watched the Smurfs all the time. I had this shirt that said "Smurfettes can do Anything!" (see her little note to me?) I wore the crap out of that shirt. I just spent 20 minutes looking to see if I had a picture of me wearing it, but my mom must have all of those pictures. Still, even if I had it, it wouldn't be as awesome as the hat my mom gave me.

My mom also included a boatload of other goodies - including White Chocolate M&Ms in candy corn colors;

and a copy of an audio book she "read" recently and really liked called, "The Lost Memoirs of Jane Austen";



Jane Eyre, the movie (awesome!!) and Rango;

and finally, the treasure of all treasures.... Books! a book of Sudoku puzzles, as well as "The Book Thief" and "Water for Elephants."

All of that was enough to cheer me up, but then I finally got my new birthday dress in the mail (the one that is awesome, but my husband bought a size too small, so it had to be exchanged). Then today we went shopping and I got two new more dresses for work, and I'm so excited for work next week just because I get to wear new dresses all week.

I'm also excited about reading again. I've been kind of slacking in reading. I'm reading Frankenstein again for book club, and I tried reading some background information on Mary Shelley as well as the book itself, since I've read the book twice before. But it all seems so educational. I now have a stack of fun books that I'd like to get through.

I have read several books this year that I haven't yet reviewed or talked about here. I will get around to that soon. I guess.

Today is Dewey's Readathon. I was going to participate, and I still may do some reading this afternoon, but it always seems to fall on a day when I have other stuff planned. Obviously it's not too much of a priority for me. I do kind of wish I would have done it, though. I will have to do an unofficial readathon sometime soon.

I actually have nothing planned for tomorrow, so if I feel like it, I'll do some reviews and reading. Or else I won't. Whatever. No pressure. Blogs are supposed to be fun, not work.

In Stitches

In Stitches

By Anthony Youn, M.D.

This memoir of a young Korean man's journey through medical school is clever, witty and fun. In it, Dr. Youn tells the story of how he knew his whole life that he was going to be a doctor - because his dad told him so. But Dr. Youn describes how he made the experience his own, how he really wanted it for himself too. And he describes exactly how and why he chose to specialize in plastic surgery. It begins with his first day of med school, with some childhood flashbacks, and ends when he finishes all of his residency and other training requirements - the moment he realizes "I'm a doctor."

This is a fast read, with fun characters and interesting tidbits about his school, and the med school process. I confess that it would have been less interesting to me had I not read this the week after I took the bar exam. I spent a lot of time comparing the law school process to the med school process. They are both stressful schools, with a lot of pressure, and not very much sleep.

However after reading this book, I have come to one conclusion: I am so glad I chose law school. Not only would the science, blood, and buckets of hands and other body parts scare me away, but becoming a doctor is a hell of a lot harder than becoming a lawyer. There are two years of intense and terrifying classes. A year of interning with different areas of medicine and then after that there are residency requirements and if you want to be a specialist there are even more years of training and practice.

I particularly enjoyed the part of the book where Dr. Youn was describing the different medical practices. I love the idea of this. I think law school should have something like this - maybe not a whole year, but it sure would be nice to actually do some work in an area of law before going out to practice, rather than just get an introduction in a class. For example, I did really well in my Wills and Trusts class and I thought the material was interesting. I imagined meeting all kinds of interesting rich old people who want me to write a will leaving everything to their dog. But would I really like to sit in an office all day going over will provisions and making sure that trustees fulfill their fiduciary obligations? I'm not so sure. It would be nice to take that for a spin.

Anyway, the point is that I really enjoyed this memoir. It's fast, fun, good writing and gives an inside perspective on a world most people don't know anything about.

Shades of Grey

Hello! I've been having so much fun reading! I have a stack of books to review here, a couple of which I read a long time ago, but I've also been reading a lot in the past couple of weeks. That's the good side of unemployment. Unfortunately for my TBR list, I've been acquiring a lot of books that weren't on the list, so the list gets longer, while I keep discovering new books. It's a never-ending cycle, but I'm happy with that.

Also, I've been distracted by internet and magazine reading too, so while I've been reading books, I've also been catching up on everything else I neglected this summer while studying - blogs, my Bookmarks Magazines, news, TV, etc.

Finally, I've also been watching a lot of movies the past couple of weeks. I used the excuse that I was making a baby blanket for my new niece, but I think also the blanket was an excuse to watch a lot of movies. My Netflix queue is getting shorter, and my stack of magazines is shrinking too. So I suppose it's time to talk about the books!


Shades of Grey by Jasper Fforde

Well, Jasper Fforde has done it again. He's written an interesting, crazy new world in which social standing is based solely on how much color each person sees. The main character, Eddie Russet, is a Red and he has been reassigned to the Outer Fringes due to nonconforming behavior. Still, he hopes to marry up into the Oxblood family and score high on his perception test which would allow him to become a head prefect. Then he meets Jane. She's a Grey, and therefore the lowest social level. She has the perfect nose, but she is angry and mean, and seems to be trying to kill Eddie for no reason.

There are all sorts of colorful characters in this book (pun intended). Jasper Fforde's strong suit is his cleverness - not just in coming up with a strange, interesting, futuristic society, but in coming up with town names, character names, and dialogue that is absurd but appropriate. More than once while I was reading in bed, I would chuckle. Mike would ask me what was so funny, but I could never tell him because it took too long to explain why it was so funny.

That's the great and terrible thing about Jasper Fforde books - they are so great that you want to share them and talk about them with everyone. But you can't just tell someone about it. You have to get the other person to read it, and then talk about how fun, clever and witty he is. Reading one of his novels is a great experience - wholly satisfying in its complexity and depth, yet with a tone of frivolity and silliness.

The only complaint I have about this novel is that it is the first in a planned series. There are at least two more books coming. Normally that wouldn't bother me - most of his books are part of a series, so it's expected, and the idea of more books coming in this series is exciting. But the problem is that the majority of this book was a set up for adventures to come in future books. There was a lot of character development and not a lot of plot. The last third of the book went by quickly, because things started happening. Until then it was difficult to keep all the characters straight and to determine which characters were going to be important.

I think some of the slowness of the novel was my fault, though. I started reading it this summer in the midst of crazy bar-prep study and stress. It was too difficult to lose myself in this book because the society and all its constructs were too complex to understand without a lot of rereading of certain parts. So I put it aside and picked it up after taking the bar. But I picked it back up too soon, I think. I was still decompressing and I didn't start over at the beginning, so I had to keep flipping back to remember things. My heart wasn't in it, so I put it down again. I picked it up again finally after a two week trip that was nonstop laughter with my family, and that's when it was really good.

I totally recommend Jasper Fforde to everyone. But if you're new to him, you should start with The Eyre Affair (the first in the Thursday Next series in which Thursday is a detective in the Jurisfiction unit and in which she fights people who would do harm to books) or the Nursery Crime series, which starts with The Big Over Easy in which Jack Sprat tries to figure out whether Humpty Dumpty was murdered or whether he committed suicide.

For more information, go to his website at http://www.jasperfforde.com/

Happy Reading!

A Clockwork Orange - Review

I've been wanting to read this novel for quite awhile. But at the same time, I was hesitant - unsure I would like it, or appreciate it. I wrote about some of those hesitations and about my thoughts on the author's introduction to the novel here.

Now that the bar is over and I have considerably more brain power and my attention span has returned, I dove in ready for whatever Mr. Burgess had in store for me. Boy was I surprised - this novel wasn't as difficult, uncomfortable or unlikable as I thought. I really liked it.

A Clockwork Orange

By: Anthony Burgess

W.W. Norton & Co. 1987




The Language:

The language and vocabulary of this novel were challenging at first, but it was a very interesting aspect of the novel. It took me a while to get into the rhythm of the language, and to learn the vocabulary, but I eventually learned that rot means mouth and tolchock means a punch. I still am honestly unsure of what the word "horrorshow" means - but I do know it's an adjective that denotes something happy or good or cool or hip or fun or something similar.

Teenagers always have their own language - using and creating new words - but this was crazy. The trick to reading it is to just accept it and let it slide on by. Because I was so confused by the language the first few pages, I considered giving up the book. But after a few pages I began to understand words from context, and after a couple of chapters, the language was no longer a barrier.

In fact, the language really is a character all itself - a character I grew to appreciate, if not love. A quote from William Burroughs on the back of the book sums up the language element nicely: "I do not know of any other writer who has done as much with language as Mr. Burgess has done here - the fact that this is also a very funny book may pass unnoticed."

The Story

The story is simple: young, sociopathic hooligan eventually gets careless; goes to jail; government creates controversial "cure" for criminal and violent behavior; hooligan becomes the test subject; hooligan is "cured;" anti-government group uses "cured" hooligan as a poster boy for their cause; hooligan's "cure" is undone by the government because of all the bad publicity.

It's a simple story, but the characters and philosophical questions are complex. These are teenagers committing these horrible crimes. Alex is 15(!) and he's committing random and senseless thefts, assaults, rapes, and eventually murder. These are sociopaths - no human emotions or empathy - just the desire for entertainment at the expense of others with no regret. It's horrible. Somehow, though, the language used makes the fully described crimes seem dulled and at least less horrible.

The Philosophical Question

The controversial "cure" mentioned above is essentially behavior modification. The doctors give the subject a shot that will make him physically ill. They then sit the subject in front of a movie screen, prop his eyes open and make it impossible for him to move while they show him hours upon hours of violent films. Over a two week period, the subject learns to associate violence and criminal behavior with feelings of physical illness, and eventually without the medication, he feels sick whenever he considers violent behavior.

It seems like a great idea, if you are looking for a less criminal society. It saves space in jail and cuts down on the costs of rehabilitation. Also, it makes for a more thoughtful and considerate, law-abiding society.

The argument against it, of course is that now the subject has lost his freedom of choice. His motivations do not change - only his behavior does. He doesn't choose non-violent behavior, he basically has no choice. He isn't automatically good - he just appears to be. So it's a debate about what's more important: "Does God want goodness or the choice of goodness?" (p. 95 of my edition, a question by the prison chaplain.)

The "cure" doesn't make Alex a better person - he still wants to do bad things to people. He doesn't want to get a job and become a productive member of society. He is still horribly mean to his parents who have always been his doormats. He hasn't grown or become more understanding of his parents or of others. He is still wholly self-centered. He only refrains from violence and thieving because it makes him physically ill. It's almost like the "cure" made him more self-centered. "Self-interest, fear of physical pain, drove him to [act in a way contrary to his inclinations]." It's an interesting debate, but also, the author is obviously in favor of choice.

The Extra Chapter / Conclusion

This is a novel of change and evolution. It's only fitting that my feelings about the novel changed so drastically from start to finish. After reading the first couple of pages, I expected the book to be a chore and the character of Alex to be unlikeable. However, in the end I really enjoyed the philosophical questions and the evolution of Alex - even though his evolution wasn't really internal.

Also, it is impossible to talk about this novel without discussing its conclusion, so sorry for any spoilers (but not that sorry since this book was first copyrighted in 1962 - you've had plenty of time to read it). In my previous post about this novel (find it here) I wrote about how the author was so upset that the final chapter was left out of the original publications in the U.S. I can understand him being upset because he wrote it the way he did for a reason. But also, I can understand now why the U.S. publishers (and Kubric in his film) ignored the last chapter.

I found the last chapter to be disconnected and incongruous with the rest of the novel. It doesn't make sense. Why would a sociopath like Alex, suddenly cured of the "cure" suddenly just grow out of his violent tendencies? Does the author mean to tell me that all the raping, pillaging, destruction, and violence was just boys being boys? That's what it seems like - he just went through a violent phase, and now that he's an adult and he's been to jail for a couple of years, he's over that part of his life. It's almost insulting to my intelligence. Or maybe I'm just cynical. I know the author's point is that anyone can redeem his character, but I haven't seen any evidence of redemption in Alex. He still only wants things for himself - he wants a wife because he wants companionship. He is bored with his friends so he wants new ones. It's not a change in his way of functioning - it's only a change in what he wants.

Since reading the novel, I reread the introduction. In it, Burgess recalls his American publisher telling him the last chapter was a sellout. And I can see the publisher's point - it doesn't seem to match and it seems like it was put there to make the book more appealing. And, to give Burgess all the credit he deserves, he admits that his "aesthetic judgment may have been faulty. Writers are rarely their own best critics."

In the end, 21st chapter or not, the lesson to be learned from A Clockwork Orange is best stated in the words of the author: "It is as inhuman to be totally good as it is to be totally evil. The important thing is moral choice. Evil has to exist along with good, in order that moral choice may operate."

Powell's August 2011

Well, I made my trip to Powell's Bookstore today like I do every time I come home to visit my family. My parents live on a 5 acre spread outside of Woodland, Washington, about 30 miles north of Portland. I used to live in Portland, and Powell's is like a second home to me - they have everything, and they have used copies of almost everything as well - except new releases, of course. They buy used books too, although I usually love my books too much to sell them back - even if they are often used and not very pretty.

Anyway, today I scored pretty well: 8 books for under $50. Here they are!



Starting from the back left and going clockwise:

1. The Princes in the Tower by Alison Weir
2. Her Husband: Hughes and Plath - A Marriage by Diane Middlebrook
3. Kerouac: A Biography by Ann Charters
4. Return of the Native by Thomas Hardy
5. The Snows of Kilimanjaro by Ernest Hemingway
6. Moll Flanders by Daniel Defoe
7. Bloody Marry by Carolly Erickson
8. The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath

I'm not sure when I'll get around to reading all of these - in addition to all the books I have at home to read - but they'll go onto the TBR shelf when I get home. I can't wait to spend some good time reading this fall. I can't even tell you how great it feels to have no pressure on me right now. I have the pressure of finding a job, but that's really nothing compared to how much work I was doing before. It is going to be luxurious to only have a job - even if that job is a crappy Associate Attorney position that pays low and requires a lot of time. I am feeling good right now, and I'm going to ride this wave as long as I can!

I suppose I better get reading so that I can write some reviews!

I'm Back!

Hi Everyone!

Ok, I've been out of the game for most of this summer, and I guess most of this year. I haven't really been reading much this year, but I'm ready to get back to it. It's been a long and stressful year, and reading has been a comfort to me, but now I'm ready to really dig into some good books. Less book candy, more book meat and rich desserts!

I was doing a good job of keeping up with the Google Reader for a lot of the summer, but I just let it go after awhile. Today when I checked I had over 2400 posts to read. So I just hit mark all as read. It's a fresh start, and I can't wait to check in with all my favorite bloggers.

I'm headed to Southern Washington tomorrow for 10 days with my family. It will be the first time my two siblings and I have all been home at the same time in several years. It's going to be great! I know the highlight of the trip will be our pilgrimage to book Mecca - Powell's. I can't wait to spend an afternoon there pouring through books. It's fantastic to be there (the smell alone makes me content), but it's always difficult to make those decisions about which books to take home.

So this is just a quick post to say I'm back, and to say that I have about 4-5 books to review (I know, it's pathetic, but if you want me to write reviews of my bar prep books, I can do that - believe me, I have a lot to say about that!). I'll be posting reviews soon enough - as soon as I get to reading!

Do you know what "A Clockwork Orange" Is?

Because studying for the bar sucks so much and I spent all day today hunched over a book with 200 multiple choice questions, I decided to reward myself with a bath tonight. My back needed to calm down and I needed to escape. I considered listening to a civil procedure lecture via the iPod while laying in the bubbles, but quickly dismissed that idea.

The whole point of taking a bath is to relax with a book. Unfortunately, everything I'm in the middle of reading right now is on a Kindle or an iPad and those don't go anywhere near a tub. So I checked out my TBR shelf. I chose three books I've been wanting to read, and I figured I'd give them all a chance to hook me.

My mom sent me "The Literary Guernsey and Potato Peel Society" for Christmas, and while it seems like a decent (easy) read for a lazy afternoon someday, it's written all in letters, and I just don't have the patience for that right now. The other book I looked over is one my brother sent to me: "Warbreaker." It seems like it will be a good story, and I have always liked the books my brother sends me, but it's a fantasy / adventure type novel, and I don't have the brain power or desire to learn about a whole different world/society right now.

My third option is a book I've been wanting to read for years, but somehow never quite got around to: "A Clockwork Orange." I've seen the movie, of course, and I think I remember liking it. Although all I really remember is that there is a lot of violence, and in one scene they beat up someone while "Singing in the Rain" plays in the background. I remember thinking it was a really significant movie, but I was 19 and dating a boy who loved it, so who knows what I really thought. Anyways, because I've never forgotten that juxtaposition of violence and a song from a musical I grew up watching with my mother, I've always wanted to know more about it. I'm not sure quite what has kept me from reading it until now, other than the fact that I am afraid I won't get it or that it will be something other than what I've built it up in my mind to be.

I still can't start reading it right now, though, because I have enough to think about with the bar studying, and I don't want to read this until I can spend some serious time with the text - preferably when I have nothing else going on at all - like August when I'll be unemployed.

But tonight, I read the introduction written by Anthony Burgess himself, and I have some thoughts on it that I wanted to get out. I bought this copy of the book at a used book store in Fort Collins this past March, while visiting my brother (he's coming up a lot in this post), and it's published by W.W. Norton & Company in 1986. I only mention this, because I'm not sure whether this particular introduction is in other printed editions.

Three things I learned from the introduction: 1) when published in England (and almost every other country in the world) it was published with 21 chapters, but the original publication in the US was published without the final chapter - more on this below; 2) the phrase "a clockwork orange" is a phrase used to describe something bizarre - like "he's as queer as a clockwork orange." I always just assumed (not totally incorrectly it turns out) that the title was something weird and made up to go along with the weirdness of the story; and 3) I can't decide whether I like Anthony Burgess or not. I'm leaning toward not.

First, let's talk about the difference in the US version. Burgess tells us that his US publisher made him leave out the last chapter as a condition of publication in the US, and he was so desperate for money that he agreed (against his better judgment, of course). The publisher adds his own little note later saying that he remembers things differently, but it doesn't really matter which story is true, what matters is that they are now publishing the novel as Burgess intended. This seems like a petty little note to include and it's clear there's no love between these two.

The significance of leaving off the last chapter is important. In the 21st chapter, apparently, something that happens to make the protagonist more human. He sees the pointlessness and futility of his actions and his remorse makes him more human. As Burgess says:

"There is, in fact, not much point in writing a novel unless you can show the possibility of moral transformation ... When a fictional work fails to show change, when it merely indicates that human character is set, stony, unregenerable, then you are out of the field of the novel and into that of the fable or the allegory."

He makes a good point, and I agree. Apparently his US publishers thought it would be more interesting to portray the character and leave off the change of heart (i.e. it would sell better to Americans). Stanley Kubrick made his movie based on the American novel, also leaving out the change in the protagonist. Certainly it made the film the work of art that has interested and (scared?) us all to this day - an unrepentant and unchanged character.

All of this is very interesting, and it's great background information, but the point I want to bring up is that the way he writes his explanation makes me dislike Burgess some. I almost always dislike artists that put their work out into the world, and then act like they didn't want it to be a commercial success. Burgess, in this introduction goes on for several paragraphs about how this isn't the work that means the most to him, and compares himself to Rachmaninoff and Beethoven who were not appreciated for their later, more developed work, but were known for the work created when they were young and less experienced. He goes on about why it was so important to him to have 21 chapters and having only 20 threw off the whole numerological point he was trying to make (something about reaching an age of maturity).

But then he freely admits that he wrote the book for money. He agreed to whatever the publisher asked of him simply so that he could make a buck. He admits to appealing to our sinful natures and to the baser interests of the human race to make a point about moral choices- right and wrong, free will, etc. - which is kind of an elementary, or at least simple, theme. He writes that this novel "is a work too didactic to be artistic," and he seems to be ashamed of it.

This is what bothers me. Here is this brilliant man who has written this great work, which has inspired other great works, and has infiltrated the imagination of people worldwide, and he is too much of a snob to be proud of or glad that he wrote it. I dislike this so much. I also hate it in actors who later in their careers become ashamed of the commercial and (in their minds) "silly" projects they did while building a career - like they're above that now because they only do independent films. But it's necessary. It's part of becoming an artist, and there's no use looking down on it - it's the experience and the creativity and the product they've put out into the world, and which has shaped them as a performer / artist, and which has shaped our perception of them.

Inherent in those kinds of statements is the idea that if we (as consumers an patrons of art) like this novel, or those commercial films, or their other early pieces, we don't have good taste. We can't possibly understand their art or their point of view. It's snobbery, but it's also arrogance. And I just don't like it.

But, having said all that, I'm obviously still going to read the book. The fact that I dislike the author won't have anything (much) to do with how I read the novel. I believe I'm capable of divorcing the art from the artist. An honestly, it's the artists who are infuriating and unbearable in reality that create the best works. And with this much to say about the Introduction, imagine what intellectual treats await me within the actual story!

Have I embarrassed myself with this post? I've just re-read it, and I sound kind of snobby. Oh well, those are my impressions. In the final words of Burgess from this introduction: "Eat this sweetish segment or spit it out. You are free."

How Hogwarts is like Law School

I started about 3 different books over the past couple of weeks, but I just can't get anywhere with them. All of them have been different genres, and yet I still can't quite settle into something. It's me, not books. It's finals, you see. And that means I don't have any time for reading except the 20 minutes or so between the moment where I fall exhausted and drained into bed and the moment I fall asleep. Apparently I have plenty of time for frivolous blog posts, though.

Often, with my busy life, that's the only time I get to read, but my brain is so tired lately that I don't want to work at reading. I have no imagination. So I decided to go with something comforting and familiar. It will help me fall asleep and let me totally immerse myself so that finals aren't on my mind when I fall asleep (that way I don't have stress dreams). With the new (and last!) Harry Potter movie coming out, there's been a lot of HP talk on the blogs over the past couple of weeks, so I figured that starting the series from the beginning would get me through finals and at least part of the summer of hell.

While reading Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone over the last few nights, it dawned on me, that Hogwarts is a lot like law school. I started making a mental note of all the similarities (apparently my brain is never too tired to make lists). This is totally nerding out, but I can't help it. Don't judge, enjoy!

1. A Whole New World (for most)

No, we're not talking about Aladdin here, I said Hogwarts, remember? When all the tiny little witches and wizards show up on the first day, they're nervous, excited, meeting new friends (and enemies), getting lost, and having a feast. That's not an inaccurate description of my first day of orientation. The main difference is that I wasn't tiny. Or a witch. But I was a stranger - moved to Southern California from Portland, Oregon - in a completely different world. I didn't know anyone, and I didn't know what to expect.

I think I was a lot like Hermione at that point in time - I read about a hundred (ok minor exaggeration) books on law school, what it would be like, how it could change me and affect my personal life, and what classes would be like. But reading about it and experiencing it were two different things.

In other ways, I was much more prepared for a life of magic/law - having worked in law firms as a secretary and paralegal for 4 years before law school made me more like a student from an old wizarding family. I may not have known all the particulars, but I knew what it was like to live and work in the legal community. Sort of like the difference between showing up at Hogwarts from a wizarding family rather than from a muggle family. It was not a particularly big help in classes (not in the book and not in law school), but still, it made me a bit more comfortable.

So yes, we all entered a new world - full of funny Latin phrases and needing a little bit of magic to get us through the first year.

2. Terrifying Professors

There is nothing quite like being the first to be called on in class. It's terrifying - even if it's happening to someone else. I remember in our first Contracts class, the professor called on a girl in the front row. The girl had read the assignment, and had handwritten notes on the cases in some loose-leaf paper on the desk in front of her. The professor was very loud, spoke very fast and demanded an even faster response. The girl was startled, and didn't respond immediately. The professor then went over to her and demanded to see her notes. For about 15 seconds, the professor looked over the notes, then held them up for the entire class to see and told us that this is NOT how we should be taking notes for her class. She then lectured/yelled at us for about 10 minutes about how we were never going to make it (this makes me think of doing a post comparing law school to Army Basic Training). The poor girl started crying, and who could blame her? The rest of us breathed a collective sigh of relief that it had been her and not us. I think that professor also yelled at several other students that class.

This scenario played out in my mind while I was reading the scene where they all go to their first potions class with Professor Snape. With no warning, Snape calls on Harry to answer all sorts of seemingly random questions. When Harry can't answer, Snape ridicules him and teases him for not knowing. He accuses Harry of never having read any of his text book, which is unfair, because Harry did read, he just didn't know he'd have to remember all those details.

Also in that same scene, there's Hermione, jumping up and down just begging to be called on. There's one in every law school class too (this is where I stop being anything like her, btw). I can think of a couple in my year, actually.

3. Being Stuck with Your Section / House for Everything

The first year students at Hogwarts are all split into their "houses" when they first arrive. It's where they'll live, but most of all it means being put with people that they'll have classes with forever. Section assignments for law students are only for one year. After that we're free to pick our own schedules, which means more random people in classes, and different class sizes.

It's not a terrible thing to be in a section. In fact, it's quite comforting. It means a familiar situation in each class. It means really getting to know and understand people. It's like being in a family. But along with the good comes the bad - there's no escaping your family. Good luck trying to get some privacy. Good luck keeping your feelings hidden. Everyone will know everything about you after an entire year together.

At Hogwarts, people are sorted into houses based on personality traits and the deepest desires of their hearts. At law school, I think it's more of a random thing. At our school, students could earn certificates in different areas of law - I chose International Law, for example. I think the only real distinction to the sections was that all students working toward a certain certificate were put in a section. For example, my section had all of the people working towards an International Law certificate. Other than that, I'm sure it was just random.

Still, our sections became our families, and even after two years of spreading out and meeting lots of new people from the other sections, my section will still always be my family.

4. First Years aren't allowed to do anything cool

At Hogwarts, first years can't bring brooms to school. They also can't play on the Quidditch team, or lead anything. Different rules apply to them. The same goes for law students. First year law students can't bring their brooms to school either.

Seriously, though, it makes sense. First years have enough to worry about - getting ridiculed in class, the pages and pages of reading, writing your first Memorandum, and dealing with the stress of first year finals is unlike any other stress in the world. I personally could not have handled anything else. I couldn't have begun or run a student organization. I also could not have held a job or anything. I had a husband (still have him - whew), and that was almost more than I could handle. How he handled me, I'll never know.

5. Potions

At Hogwarts, Potions is a class. The students learn the fine art of brewing the perfect potion. I've always thought of it rather like an advanced cooking class. But at law school, potions are what we drink to try to numb ourselves. I turned 31 in my first month of law school. I drank more alcohol by the end of that school year than I had through all of my 20s. I've had never been a big drinker, but boy have I become a lush.

Part of it is because every social function (bar reviews, Barrister's Ball, networking events) revolves around alcohol and takes place in a bar. Part of it is because after all the stress and pain of law school, it's necessary to meet up with your friends (mostly only from your own section) and get a little rowdy on the weekend. How else could I have retained my sanity? I realize (maybe better than most) that alcohol is not the solution to all problems. But it is the solution to some, and it sure can help a person relax.

6. Robes

At Hogwarts, all the students wear robes. Their everyday attire is robes. Their athletic attire is robes. When they get up, they put on a bathrobe over their sleeping robes. It's kind of silly and annoying. I've often faulted J.K. Rowling for having the characters constantly in robes. Until I thought about it in comparison to the legal world.

Robes are an essential part of the legal community. Judges wear robes. During initiation into Phi Alpha Delta (the legal fraternity at my school), the leaders wore robes. During Moot Court competitions, the judges wear robes. When we graduate, we'll wear robes. In the legal community, robes are a symbol of status and honor. Robes are reserved for truly important people and special occasions. It makes me feel like I shouldn't mock the robes in Harry Potter (well, at least not as much as I do).

7. The students think they can take on real-world problems

In the Harry Potter novels, Ron, Hermione and Harry are always solving problems and fighting fights that are way beyond their years and maturity levels. They're fighting the greatest evil ever known to wizard-kind.

At law school, even first year students think they can make a huge difference in the world, and though I personally find this sort of hubris and optimism irritating and mildly nauseating, I do see that hope is a good thing, and people should never be afraid of trying to tackle big problems.

I am a cynic when it comes to many things, though. Harry Potter and friends eventually succeed in defeating evil, but it took them 7 years! Through that process, they enlisted the help of hundreds of friends and many people died. I'm not saying things are as dramatic as all that at law school (I don't think anyone ever died trying to legalize marijuana - maybe gay marriage, though), but it's still extremely optimistic of some law students to think that during their first year of law school they know enough about the law and the legislative process to actually make a difference.

But I don't want it to stop. The surest way to stop progress is to not try. Progress is important because if we're not moving forward, we're moving backwards. Maybe I'm not as cynical as I thought - maybe it's more like laziness. The point is that just because I'm not idealistic, doesn't mean I don't respect those who are.

8. In the End, Nothing is As it Seems

In the land of Harry Potter, they learn to question everything - make no assumptions. Professors who seemed evil turn out to not be so terrible after all. Maybe a giant and terrifying creature isn't really all that bad - maybe he just wants respect and love.

In the land of the law, we do the same - question everything. Every assumption you make is a missed opportunity. Opposing counsel aren't (always) evil and mean-spirited. It's possible to have a professional and courteous relationship with him. That contracts professor who was so awful on the first day of class? Turns out she had a lot of health problems, and couldn't even finish out the year - she turned out to be not so scary and evil after all - kind of like Snape.

Also, sometimes the people we think are there to help us most are really the bad guy. It's disheartening to realize that law school is a business, and often the administration is concerned only with the bottom line and not "customer service." It's depressing to be thought of as a number by the people I've looked up to. Also, all that "help" we got from financial aid doesn't seem so helpful right about now. They "helped" me get into a whole heap of debt.

In the end, though, I will never regret anything I did in law school. I've learned so much, and I think I may have finally grown up. I will miss everyone here (even the Draco Malfoys of our class), including the professors who have done so much and given so much to help make us what we are today. Here's to a magical future!