I have decided to finish up the LOTR series that has been bringing me down for over a year. I've read the first 5 pages so far. I know it takes a little bit to get into a book, but I think this one is different. The first half is all about the random characters that I don't really care about, and the second half is when Frodo throws the ring into the volcano. All I'm really interested in is the second half, but I can't just skip the story. I wish it was more integrated so I would keep reading in order to find out what happens to Frodo. I hope I can get through it before work and school pick up again.
Oh what a project this is turning out to be!
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Monday, September 5, 2011
30%
I just wanted to update with the statement that I have officially read 30 books from the list, which is more than double what I started out with. Before setting out on this adventure, I had read 14, and then last year I read 9 and this year so far I've read 7, so hooray for being farther along than I thought I was!
(I have actually read more than 7 books this year, and to be even more clear, some of the numbers on the list are actually several books. I'm getting very close with Lord of the Rings, and making progress in the Chronicles of Narnia. So, 7 for this year and 9 for last year are actually numbers crossed off the list and not actual books. Ergo, reading The Two Towers and The Horse and his Boy don't count until the last of the series are finished....which is a little bit of a rip off but possibly that much more satisfying when it's done)
How long until I get to 40%? We shall see, we shall see....
(I have actually read more than 7 books this year, and to be even more clear, some of the numbers on the list are actually several books. I'm getting very close with Lord of the Rings, and making progress in the Chronicles of Narnia. So, 7 for this year and 9 for last year are actually numbers crossed off the list and not actual books. Ergo, reading The Two Towers and The Horse and his Boy don't count until the last of the series are finished....which is a little bit of a rip off but possibly that much more satisfying when it's done)
How long until I get to 40%? We shall see, we shall see....
Sunday, September 4, 2011
1984: check!
Another one crossed off my list!
So this was definitely an interesting read, and as predicted, something happened right after I posted last. And it did involve the girl and the thought police.
The ending was not quite what I was expecting, but it worked nonetheless. I definitely have more respect for Orwell after reading this book, as opposed to the misery that is Animal Farm. It is interesting how he juxtaposes Winston and Julia. They believe the same thing and have similar ideologies, but are different ages. In other words, Winston can remember times that were different from the year 1984, while Julia has grown up as a child of the party, and puts up a good front in order to disguise her true feelings.
One of the more terrifying ideas in the book was that of doublethink and altering the past. At one point, Winston noted that if O'Brien believed he was floating and Winston also believed he was floating, regardless of whether he was floating or not, he was floating. The making up of lies and forcing others to believe them was definitely an interesting concept. Bush thought we were going into Iraq to get weapons of mass destruction, and if Americans believe that, then that's what we're doing, regardless of why the war started in the first place. Orwell definitely is a strange thinker...
Additionally, the passages and chapters about Winston changing facts, deleting references to people who had disappeared, switching papers back and forth between Eurasia and Eastasia to convince the public of the truth were mind boggling too. Essentially, Winston and others work to destroy the past and make it relevant only to the present. The fact that Winston was one of the only ones who could remember the past was interesting, but vague. It could be that others could remember the past but were so brainwashed that they accepted everything Big Brother said without question, or that Winston was legitimately one of the only ones who could remember. I think the former is more likely because Winston did talk to a prole who could remember things, so it's likely that the party has brainwashed memories out of people. While I am glad I do not live like Winston, I feel there are enough eerie coincidences or foresight by Orwell to be just a little off put.
I don't feel the need to analyze everything that happened in the second half of the book, but I will leave you with some quotes I enjoyed.
"'Who controls the past,' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'" (p. 34)
"Perhaps a lunatic was simply a minority of one." (p. 80)
"The best books, he perceived, are those that tell you what you know already." (p. 200)
I wasn't expecting to like that book, or even have it influence me as it did. Kudos to Orwell, I guess. Next up is most likely Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Knowing me, though, I may come back with something completely different and not even something on my shelf. We'll see about reading though...school starts again on Tuesday so my free time may vanish before my very eyes.
So this was definitely an interesting read, and as predicted, something happened right after I posted last. And it did involve the girl and the thought police.
The ending was not quite what I was expecting, but it worked nonetheless. I definitely have more respect for Orwell after reading this book, as opposed to the misery that is Animal Farm. It is interesting how he juxtaposes Winston and Julia. They believe the same thing and have similar ideologies, but are different ages. In other words, Winston can remember times that were different from the year 1984, while Julia has grown up as a child of the party, and puts up a good front in order to disguise her true feelings.
One of the more terrifying ideas in the book was that of doublethink and altering the past. At one point, Winston noted that if O'Brien believed he was floating and Winston also believed he was floating, regardless of whether he was floating or not, he was floating. The making up of lies and forcing others to believe them was definitely an interesting concept. Bush thought we were going into Iraq to get weapons of mass destruction, and if Americans believe that, then that's what we're doing, regardless of why the war started in the first place. Orwell definitely is a strange thinker...
Additionally, the passages and chapters about Winston changing facts, deleting references to people who had disappeared, switching papers back and forth between Eurasia and Eastasia to convince the public of the truth were mind boggling too. Essentially, Winston and others work to destroy the past and make it relevant only to the present. The fact that Winston was one of the only ones who could remember the past was interesting, but vague. It could be that others could remember the past but were so brainwashed that they accepted everything Big Brother said without question, or that Winston was legitimately one of the only ones who could remember. I think the former is more likely because Winston did talk to a prole who could remember things, so it's likely that the party has brainwashed memories out of people. While I am glad I do not live like Winston, I feel there are enough eerie coincidences or foresight by Orwell to be just a little off put.
I don't feel the need to analyze everything that happened in the second half of the book, but I will leave you with some quotes I enjoyed.
"'Who controls the past,' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'" (p. 34)
"Perhaps a lunatic was simply a minority of one." (p. 80)
"The best books, he perceived, are those that tell you what you know already." (p. 200)
I wasn't expecting to like that book, or even have it influence me as it did. Kudos to Orwell, I guess. Next up is most likely Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Knowing me, though, I may come back with something completely different and not even something on my shelf. We'll see about reading though...school starts again on Tuesday so my free time may vanish before my very eyes.
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Mid 1984
I decided to read 1984 for a few reasons:
1. My friends recommended it. Most likely they read it in high school. High school book are generally dry and analyzed to death, and therefore widely read in sparknotes versions, so for several of them to recommend this one, it had to have been pretty good.
2. My aunt gave me 3 books for Christmas last year: The Lovely Bones, The Catcher In The Rye, and 1984. I figured I should have them all read before Christmas comes around again (IN LESS THAN 4 MONTHS!!!)
3. I owned the book and it was small enough to fit in my purse to take to work and read there in the case that the kids I watch wanted to play together and not fight.
Additionally, I borrowed the audiobook from the library and listen to that when I work out. I do like music when I work out, but I also use music when I study or write papers, so in general I am pretty good at tuning it out or having it for background noise, and that doesn't work as well on a treadmill. Audiobooks, on the other hand, require concentration, which means that I am concentrating on listening if I don't want to hear the same thing 10 times over. This consequently also means that I am not focusing on how far/fast I am running or how tired I am or how heavy my 2lb weights feel.
All that being said, I am 35% done with the book, and have just finished part 1. It is surprisingly interesting for being a) Orwell, b) negative utopia, c) a little slow moving.
a) The only other Orwell I have read is Animal Farm, twice, and I did not enjoy it either time. I had to read it as summer work before 9th grade, and I didn't understand it because we had never learned about Russia, and I didn't really get what this had to do with anything else. So, while I did not expect to like Orwell for all these reasons, I am actually enjoying this book.
b) Also in 9th grade, in our unit with Animal Farm, we had to read a short story called Harrison Bergeron by Vonnegut. From what I remember, it was about a society where people are pulled down to the lowest common denominator. If one person is in a wheelchair, everyone has to be. While there are significant holes in the story (that mainly show that Vonnegut did not account for all types of diversity) I feel that Vonnegut has a point even in today's society where sometimes this happens in schools. At the end of the story, Harrison Bergeron pulls out of the chains and can fly. Ninth grade me was utterly confused and having a "question mark question mark" what the hell moment. Probably if I read it today I could figure out the ending. Anyway, Harrison Bergeron is another example of a negative utopia where people are supposed to be equal and happy in theory, but this does not work in actuality. Yes, everyone supporting Big Brother would get rid of a lot or partisan politics and political tension (our current situation in Washington comes to mind) but it's not realistic by any means. Any while in 1984 so far there are the party supporters and the proles, in a real society there would be countless other groups putting in their two cents. Though negative utopias don't exactly mirror real society (just as regular utopias don't mirror real society) I think 1984 has enough merit, issues and negligible holes in reasoning to make it valid and readable.
c) I have probably said this before, but my favorite movie is It's A Wonderful Life. And true to the title, the movie goes through the life of George Bailey: his childhood, his adult life, his marriage, his job, etc. and it doesn't get to "the good part" (disclaimer: I think the entire thing is good) aka the part with meaty plot until the last hour or so. So, in general, the movie sets itself up for over an hour and then tells a story with what it's set up. The first half of the movie is vitally important, but you can't appreciate it until you have seen what happens in the second half. I am not positive, but I have a feeling this is kind of like 1984. Having just finished part 1, I feel it is mostly setup with just a hint of plot. I've enjoyed it because I like stories about people's everyday lives. It's A Wonderful Life and Gone With The Wind are about peoples' lives and I love those two the most so far. Even Anna Karenina has its mundane parts that give away so much about the characters and lifestyle.
However, there is a distinct difference between any of those and 1984. The other books and films I've mentioned only have to set up characterization, family structures, time period, cause and effect, etc. We as readers (or viewers) can take for granted the ways in which people interact; the rules, laws, and social norms; feelings and relationships; even the things these characters might have in their houses. 1984 has to set up all of that, as well as characterization and structure and time period and cause and effect. 1984 shows a completely different world than the other works I've mentioned, so it has to start from scratch. Therefore, while I do feel it is moving slowly, it is for good reason and no more slowly than the others.
Overall, I'm excited for the rest of the book. I am hoping things will pull together at the end, and maybe an event or another character will appear to get the ball rolling. Maybe it'll be the spy girl or the super creepy thought police.
As a side note, I thought the picture on the front cover (and the little one on the spine) was a flower (or an exploding sun/space object), but my friends have informed me that it is in fact an eye. The fact that an eye is looking at me from my bookshelf creeps me out a little, so I'm going to continue to pretend it's a flower.
1. My friends recommended it. Most likely they read it in high school. High school book are generally dry and analyzed to death, and therefore widely read in sparknotes versions, so for several of them to recommend this one, it had to have been pretty good.
2. My aunt gave me 3 books for Christmas last year: The Lovely Bones, The Catcher In The Rye, and 1984. I figured I should have them all read before Christmas comes around again (IN LESS THAN 4 MONTHS!!!)
3. I owned the book and it was small enough to fit in my purse to take to work and read there in the case that the kids I watch wanted to play together and not fight.
Additionally, I borrowed the audiobook from the library and listen to that when I work out. I do like music when I work out, but I also use music when I study or write papers, so in general I am pretty good at tuning it out or having it for background noise, and that doesn't work as well on a treadmill. Audiobooks, on the other hand, require concentration, which means that I am concentrating on listening if I don't want to hear the same thing 10 times over. This consequently also means that I am not focusing on how far/fast I am running or how tired I am or how heavy my 2lb weights feel.
All that being said, I am 35% done with the book, and have just finished part 1. It is surprisingly interesting for being a) Orwell, b) negative utopia, c) a little slow moving.
a) The only other Orwell I have read is Animal Farm, twice, and I did not enjoy it either time. I had to read it as summer work before 9th grade, and I didn't understand it because we had never learned about Russia, and I didn't really get what this had to do with anything else. So, while I did not expect to like Orwell for all these reasons, I am actually enjoying this book.
b) Also in 9th grade, in our unit with Animal Farm, we had to read a short story called Harrison Bergeron by Vonnegut. From what I remember, it was about a society where people are pulled down to the lowest common denominator. If one person is in a wheelchair, everyone has to be. While there are significant holes in the story (that mainly show that Vonnegut did not account for all types of diversity) I feel that Vonnegut has a point even in today's society where sometimes this happens in schools. At the end of the story, Harrison Bergeron pulls out of the chains and can fly. Ninth grade me was utterly confused and having a "question mark question mark" what the hell moment. Probably if I read it today I could figure out the ending. Anyway, Harrison Bergeron is another example of a negative utopia where people are supposed to be equal and happy in theory, but this does not work in actuality. Yes, everyone supporting Big Brother would get rid of a lot or partisan politics and political tension (our current situation in Washington comes to mind) but it's not realistic by any means. Any while in 1984 so far there are the party supporters and the proles, in a real society there would be countless other groups putting in their two cents. Though negative utopias don't exactly mirror real society (just as regular utopias don't mirror real society) I think 1984 has enough merit, issues and negligible holes in reasoning to make it valid and readable.
c) I have probably said this before, but my favorite movie is It's A Wonderful Life. And true to the title, the movie goes through the life of George Bailey: his childhood, his adult life, his marriage, his job, etc. and it doesn't get to "the good part" (disclaimer: I think the entire thing is good) aka the part with meaty plot until the last hour or so. So, in general, the movie sets itself up for over an hour and then tells a story with what it's set up. The first half of the movie is vitally important, but you can't appreciate it until you have seen what happens in the second half. I am not positive, but I have a feeling this is kind of like 1984. Having just finished part 1, I feel it is mostly setup with just a hint of plot. I've enjoyed it because I like stories about people's everyday lives. It's A Wonderful Life and Gone With The Wind are about peoples' lives and I love those two the most so far. Even Anna Karenina has its mundane parts that give away so much about the characters and lifestyle.
However, there is a distinct difference between any of those and 1984. The other books and films I've mentioned only have to set up characterization, family structures, time period, cause and effect, etc. We as readers (or viewers) can take for granted the ways in which people interact; the rules, laws, and social norms; feelings and relationships; even the things these characters might have in their houses. 1984 has to set up all of that, as well as characterization and structure and time period and cause and effect. 1984 shows a completely different world than the other works I've mentioned, so it has to start from scratch. Therefore, while I do feel it is moving slowly, it is for good reason and no more slowly than the others.
Overall, I'm excited for the rest of the book. I am hoping things will pull together at the end, and maybe an event or another character will appear to get the ball rolling. Maybe it'll be the spy girl or the super creepy thought police.
As a side note, I thought the picture on the front cover (and the little one on the spine) was a flower (or an exploding sun/space object), but my friends have informed me that it is in fact an eye. The fact that an eye is looking at me from my bookshelf creeps me out a little, so I'm going to continue to pretend it's a flower.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)