2023 EDIT: Part of my 2023 clear-up, of books I no longer like, or am no longer interested in, or remember well as standing out, or find as special anymore, or I otherwise will not miss.
Final Score: 3.5/5
Original Review:
'A writer never forgets the first time he accepted a few coins or a word of praise in exchange for a story. He will never forget the sweet poison of vanity in his blood, and the belief that, if he succeeds in not letting anyone discover his lack of talent (...) his name printed on a miserable piece of paper that surely will outlive him. A writer is condemned to remember that moment, because from then on he is doomed and his soul has a price.' - page 1.
What did I expect from the prequel to my favourite book of all time? Beautiful, flowing writing? Check. Haunting atmosphere set in the magic and dust of early 20th century Barcelona? Check. Memorable and believably flawed characters? Check. A story that understands and loves books and how they affect the lives of the authors and readers? Check and mate.
Despite all this, I can see why some people may not be as entranced by this installment in the 'Cemetery of Forgotten Books' series as with the previous one, 'The Shadow of the Wind'. 'The Angel's Game' is clever and intricate; mirroring the classic crime thriller novels of the 18th to the 20th century, but it definitely steers more towards the weirder, magical realism route than 'The Shadow of the Wind' does. Some revelations are so strange that they seem almost random, and not every story thread gets a satisfying conclusion. Under no pretenses can it be described as "perfect".
However, 'The Angel's Game' is still one of the most haunting and disturbing books I've ever read, and I certainly did not expect it to be as great as 'The Shadow of the Wind'. Even without reading the somewhat lukewarm Goodreads reviews, I still wouldn't have over-hyped it before reading the novel itself.
Carlos Ruiz Zafón - with congratulations once again to Lucia Graves the translator - has a clear talent of grabbing and never letting the reader go once getting started. One thing you can never fault him for is his determination to make his readers think and feel uncomfortable, while also being instantly enchanted by his handling of prose and dialogue (which I'll talk about later on).
As I have said, 'The Angel's Game' is a prequel of sorts to 'The Shadow of the Wind', although it is true that both can be read as standalone titles. This title is set in Barcelona during the 1910s-1920s during its Exhibition and industrial period, so there are a lot of images describing decay, ruin and a start of a "new age". It is dazzling yet malefic, and symbolic of the main character's grim coming-of-age story.
David Martín starts off, from the first chapter, as a talented and aspiring but shy teenage writer working from the bottom in journalism. He has had a very difficult childhood (a traumatized and abusive ex-soldier father, and a mother who's abandoned him), and his only solace was in the bookshop Sempere and Son's, where he'd learned to read and write and enjoy escaping into books. This is a contrast to 'Shadow''s protagonist, Daniel, who has a long-lasting and loving relationship with his father, and whose mother was taken from him by death. And also his heart lies only in reading books, not writing them himself (despite possessing an ink pen).
However, David's story is a lot darker than Daniel's. As 'The Angel's Game''s narration progresses, David's life falls apart around him (such as receiving bad reviews of his debut novel while another of his, under the name of his old and equally despondent mentor Vidal, is praised as an instant classic). In hope from despair he essentially makes a pact with the devil: he must write a book that will change people's lives - a book to live and die for, that has a powerful soul penned from a powerful, human writer.
From then on David's identity as a person and as a writer of supernatural crime thrillers changes for the better. Or does it? As an adult learning the price of loneliness and rejection that comes from living a writer's life, he mostly locks himself up in his recently-bought tower house, writing on an old typewriter towards his death; quite literally.
All the strange, mysterious events and discoveries that David comes across in his years as a writer, are they actually happening? Is he suffering from a major psychotic breakdown? Could he be living in a world which reflects the kind of stories he reads and writes about - of his own making, or of someone else's? Is he mad... or dead, figuratively or literally? Is the ever-changing and dark and murky world of Barcelona a kind of purgatory? (A lot of written symbols and theories support this, but examining them here would take all day and night) Or is he really an unwitting pawn in an angel's game - a game of life and death, and writing about it?
David has spent most of his life writing stories about underground Barcelona and crime with a touch of paranormal macabre. Now he is the protagonist of one, whether he is aware of it or not. This book, 'The Angel's Game', could be the very book he'd set out to write that is meant to change the world.
(This is what I meant by it being weird - in a WTF mindbending way that the author seems to enjoy twisting and turning to suit both the mindset of the narrator and the confusion of the reader).
History repeating itself, biblical and classic novel references, theories on religion and beliefs, murder, love - both hetero and homo-erotic - tragedy, dreams vs reality, and Gothic mystery: this is 'The Angel's Game'.
In another similarity to 'The Shadow of the Wind', this book has a very distinctive - albeit much smaller - cast of characters. Basilio Moragas, Pedro Vidal, Victor Grandes, and Sempere Snr (neither he nor his son Sempere Jnr are given first names) really stood out for me. David Martín himself grows more and more ugly in character as the novel carries on (his shyness and innocence pretty much disappear after the first 100 pages), but that's to be expected when considering his unfortunate and disconcerting circumstances.
But my favourite and by far the best person in 'The Angel's Game' is Isabella; a seventeen-year-old aspiring writer whom David reluctantly accepts as his writing assistant and housekeeper to his ancient tower house. If Fermín Romero de Torres was the break-out character in 'The Shadow of the Wind', then Isabella Gispert is that equivalent in its prequel. She is just like David when he was younger and was writing from the heart, and she is a woman ahead of her time. She lies, cheats and disobeys, but that only makes her more likable. Funny, snappy and smart, she never takes to David's cruelty and isolation - she tells him off and the two of them are as stubborn as each other, making for some wonderfully hilarious banter. Not so much birds of a feather as they are partners in crime writing (and fighting, as Isabella is the one who uncovers the main mystery of the plot). Although I am annoyed that:
Spoiler:
There is the sordid plot device of getting the hero and heroine to trust and care for one another by having David save Isabella from an attempted gang rape on the streets. Plus Isabella ends up giving up on writing and having a free life, and becomes a wife and a mother
Spoiler end.
But Isabella remains a strong character who always keeps on top of things, and is there to help the men who cannot take care of themselves for one reason or another.
The dialogue in 'The Angel's Game' is great. Fun, philosophical without being pretentious, and marvelously clever; especially between David and Isabella, and David with everyone really. He always seems to stir up conflict and danger wherever he goes...
Right, so that's all: Above all I enjoyed 'The Angel's Game'; strange and confusing literature creature that it is.
Final Score: 4/5
Monday, 31 March 2014
Tuesday, 25 March 2014
I'm sorry. I can't hold this back anymore:
Why do so many people - predominately guys of any age - seem predisposed to hate female-lead stories? (some online comments I've read about the 'Divergent' movie have finally caused me to break my silence).
And why say you're sick of YA adaptations and so-called "action chick flicks"? As if there has never EVER been any bad or pandering male-lead movies =facepalm=
Why do so many people - predominately guys of any age - seem predisposed to hate female-lead stories? (some online comments I've read about the 'Divergent' movie have finally caused me to break my silence).
And why say you're sick of YA adaptations and so-called "action chick flicks"? As if there has never EVER been any bad or pandering male-lead movies =facepalm=
Sunday, 23 March 2014
Non-Fiction Book Review - 'Becoming A Writer' by Dorothea Brande
2023 EDIT: Part of my 2023 clear-up, of books I no longer like, or am no longer interested in, or remember well as standing out, or find as special anymore, or I otherwise will not miss.
Final Score: 4/5
Original Review:
'Becoming A Writer' has been sighted for eighty years now as the go-to handbook for every aspiring writer, and for writers wanting to get out of their own creative and personal slump which prevents them from focusing and building on their skills. Having gotten my hands on a copy and finishing it, it is not hard to read into why that is. I agree with the book's praise completely. What luck that it was in my local library!
'Becoming A Writer' is as fresh, straightforward and relevant to modern times as it was when it was first published in 1934. Dorothea Brande doesn't really teach about what content you should put into your story and why (in terms of genre and the development of plot and characters) like so many other books on writing do. She gives advice on how a writer can get into that dreamlike but highly-motivated state of mind before even approaching a word processor (or a typewriter in this case; but same thing regardless).
'Becoming A Writer' is just that; what a writer is and how you can free and attune your mind (and body) to that kind of lifestyle. It is not so much 'How to write' as it is 'How to be a writer'.
Here is only an inkling (pun intended) of Dorothea Brande's paraphrased words of wisdom (taken from my notes):
- Writing is an instinctive yet sensible energy organisation.
- Writing talent, much like the writing craft, CAN be taught. Your mindset can both inhibit you and be worked to your advantage.
- Writing is a purely psychological matter. Your conscious and unconscious must work in harmony for a balanced mind when creating magic from your fingertips (Ms Brande mainly talks about the activity of the conscious and the unconscious when writing, and debunks the myths relating to Freud's theories of these two mind fields).
- We find it in ourselves to explore ideas and be stimulated.
- The use of conscious effort can control, manage and polish story ideas. But do not pressure it, otherwise it will hamper your unconsciousness. Bottom line: consciousness directs, unconsciousness flows, like a river of activity.
- Writing is a double will and a double task: the unending imagination working steadfastly with the self-aware tools used to craft a story, like two personalities working together.
- The word "genius" means using the consciousness and unconsciousness to their full extent. There are no limits to it as the "writer's magic".
- A story idea is a focus: set it in motion.
- Good stories are honestly conceived and honestly executed.
- Trust in your own unique self to write fresh and original stories.
- Have an "innocence of eye", like a child of spontaneity and sensitivity. Be vivid and intense in viewing the world anew.
- Trust and engage in your own convictions, insights and beliefs and the reader may be persuaded of them as well.
- Know and recognise yourself, your characters, their backstories and their settings. Make your finished story convincing to yourself and it will be convincing to your readers.
The exercises Ms Brande offers along with her insights and advice are superb. It's a wonder why I wasn't taught them before; they seem very obvious. I cannot wait to try them out myself. Dorothea Brande is truly like a helpful and no-nonsense friend who knows what she is talking about and who explains herself as simply as she can.
Although, it is a little unclear whether or not she wants aspiring writers to read many books. Ms Brande does mention how too much reading hinders our own writing because we might unconsciously try to copy other styles. But she also says that we should study how authors use prose; for example how they mark the passage of time and get characters from one scene to the next. She says to learn from other writer's works and be awake to their subtleties and rhythm, and pick up on fresh, diverse words. But she is also resolute about being original and that growing as a writer means sparse or no reading of existent books. This irked me somewhat, especially since I love to read but never do I think about being like another author when I'm writing.
However, this could all go back to the use of balance when preparing to write seriously.
When Ms Brande talks about a "writer's magic" (only occasionally, it should be added), I think she's using a code which means this: believe in yourself; believe you can write and never waste priceless energy and intent. See yourself, and practice and develop your skills without end. But do not over-complicate the crafting process - use your own strengths, at your own pace.
Be alive to write! This, my friends, is what 'Becoming A Writer' ultimately teaches us.
Final Score: 4/5
Final Score: 4/5
Original Review:
'Becoming A Writer' has been sighted for eighty years now as the go-to handbook for every aspiring writer, and for writers wanting to get out of their own creative and personal slump which prevents them from focusing and building on their skills. Having gotten my hands on a copy and finishing it, it is not hard to read into why that is. I agree with the book's praise completely. What luck that it was in my local library!
'Becoming A Writer' is as fresh, straightforward and relevant to modern times as it was when it was first published in 1934. Dorothea Brande doesn't really teach about what content you should put into your story and why (in terms of genre and the development of plot and characters) like so many other books on writing do. She gives advice on how a writer can get into that dreamlike but highly-motivated state of mind before even approaching a word processor (or a typewriter in this case; but same thing regardless).
'Becoming A Writer' is just that; what a writer is and how you can free and attune your mind (and body) to that kind of lifestyle. It is not so much 'How to write' as it is 'How to be a writer'.
Here is only an inkling (pun intended) of Dorothea Brande's paraphrased words of wisdom (taken from my notes):
- Writing is an instinctive yet sensible energy organisation.
- Writing talent, much like the writing craft, CAN be taught. Your mindset can both inhibit you and be worked to your advantage.
- Writing is a purely psychological matter. Your conscious and unconscious must work in harmony for a balanced mind when creating magic from your fingertips (Ms Brande mainly talks about the activity of the conscious and the unconscious when writing, and debunks the myths relating to Freud's theories of these two mind fields).
- We find it in ourselves to explore ideas and be stimulated.
- The use of conscious effort can control, manage and polish story ideas. But do not pressure it, otherwise it will hamper your unconsciousness. Bottom line: consciousness directs, unconsciousness flows, like a river of activity.
- Writing is a double will and a double task: the unending imagination working steadfastly with the self-aware tools used to craft a story, like two personalities working together.
- The word "genius" means using the consciousness and unconsciousness to their full extent. There are no limits to it as the "writer's magic".
- A story idea is a focus: set it in motion.
- Good stories are honestly conceived and honestly executed.
- Trust in your own unique self to write fresh and original stories.
- Have an "innocence of eye", like a child of spontaneity and sensitivity. Be vivid and intense in viewing the world anew.
- Trust and engage in your own convictions, insights and beliefs and the reader may be persuaded of them as well.
- Know and recognise yourself, your characters, their backstories and their settings. Make your finished story convincing to yourself and it will be convincing to your readers.
The exercises Ms Brande offers along with her insights and advice are superb. It's a wonder why I wasn't taught them before; they seem very obvious. I cannot wait to try them out myself. Dorothea Brande is truly like a helpful and no-nonsense friend who knows what she is talking about and who explains herself as simply as she can.
Although, it is a little unclear whether or not she wants aspiring writers to read many books. Ms Brande does mention how too much reading hinders our own writing because we might unconsciously try to copy other styles. But she also says that we should study how authors use prose; for example how they mark the passage of time and get characters from one scene to the next. She says to learn from other writer's works and be awake to their subtleties and rhythm, and pick up on fresh, diverse words. But she is also resolute about being original and that growing as a writer means sparse or no reading of existent books. This irked me somewhat, especially since I love to read but never do I think about being like another author when I'm writing.
However, this could all go back to the use of balance when preparing to write seriously.
When Ms Brande talks about a "writer's magic" (only occasionally, it should be added), I think she's using a code which means this: believe in yourself; believe you can write and never waste priceless energy and intent. See yourself, and practice and develop your skills without end. But do not over-complicate the crafting process - use your own strengths, at your own pace.
Be alive to write! This, my friends, is what 'Becoming A Writer' ultimately teaches us.
Final Score: 4/5
Tuesday, 11 March 2014
Current song obsessions:
'Unchain My Heart' by Ray Charles
and pretty much every song that keeps playing on a loop at work (including 'I Feel Good' by James Brown).
Also:
'Feel For You' by Nightwish
'When Doves Cry' by Prince
It's amazing how many beautiful and meaningful songs fit into the stories I write or want to write. They should be the theme songs :)
'Unchain My Heart' by Ray Charles
and pretty much every song that keeps playing on a loop at work (including 'I Feel Good' by James Brown).
Also:
'Feel For You' by Nightwish
'When Doves Cry' by Prince
It's amazing how many beautiful and meaningful songs fit into the stories I write or want to write. They should be the theme songs :)
Saturday, 8 March 2014
Thursday, 6 March 2014
Wednesday, 5 March 2014
Book Review - 'Fangirl' by Rainbow Rowell
2019 EDIT: Lowering my original rating. As time goes on I find I can't ignore 'Fangirl''s numerous problems, which I've listed even in my old review; such as the severe lack of diversity, and the awful, absent mother (like YA needs any more terrible mothers, to the point where any that are at least decent are an endangered species). I still remember enjoying it, which is odd considering that now I barely remember much that happens in it. I think that is a sign that I should finally let it go. Cuteness can't hide everything. And yeah, I've read much better books now, and my expectations on quality have risen in recent years.
Nostalgic fondness aside, I think I've outgrown 'Fangirl'. I'm no longer a fan. Fare thee well, Cath and Wren.
Original review:
'... I'll read more and more and find that special 5-star quality book I've been starved of for months. You know that feeling you get after reading a great, awe-inspiring and wonderful book? I miss that...'
Have my prayers been answered? Barely a week after I posted this update on Goodreads and on my blog, I rated two books five stars. I'm on a roll! I can believe that books - classic and contemporary - are a thing of beauty again!
'Fangirl' - I love you. You are so absurdly adorable with your fandom interpretation and the meaning behind fan fiction and why people write it. With your coming-of-age tale about a girl, Cather "Cath" Avery, who's beginning her adult life - when in all her childhood and teen years she's been escaping into fantasy reading and online fan forums as a clutch to avoid feeling the effects of a traumatic incident in her family. With your fan fiction and "novel" extracts before the beginning of each chapter, which reflect on how Cath's own life and relationships with others will play out (such as on the theme of betrayal). And with your unbelievably believable, fleshed-out characters. Reading the stark personalities of Levi, Reagan and Cath's dad Art was all at once bittersweet and a joy.
'Fangirl' - you are so damn cute I want to hug you to infinity and beyond.
However, like everything in life, you do have problems. Minor issues really, and maybe it's just me, but I'll list them anyway, and get them out of the way quickly (Not-very-good university tutor mode coming on now):
1. Even if you are aware that you are repeating phrases, reading about Levi brushing his hair back with his hands/fingers and about his millions of smiles did get tiresome after a bit. Same with Cath and Wren constantly rolling their eyes over the slightest thing. Over-usage of the same romantic prose and words ("just" springs to mind) are what put me off romance novels in general. 'Fangirl' , you are very creative, just not so much in the language department.
2. Is there a thing now in YA where the protagonist's mother is not only absent or uninvolved, but is a terrible and selfish person who deliberately abandons her children at the worst possible time? 'My Sister Lives on the Mantelpiece' comes to mind. Though this device did help me to understand more of Cath's pain and confusion over a reality she doesn't wish to go back to.
3. 'Harry Potter' exists in the same universe as 'Fangirl' (as shown in one line of Levi's). And yet the clear rip-off series, 'Simon Snow' - about an eleven-year-old orphan boy sent to a magic school and makes friends and deadly enemies - seemingly has the most recognition and success. The first 'Harry Potter' book was published in 1997; 'Simon Snow' in 2001. It is specifically stated in 'Fangirl' that 'Simon Snow' is a global phenomenon, in both the literary and film industries (and, of course, in fandom). Professor Piper - a university professor - mentions that not everyone can write like the author of the 'Simon Snow' series, Gemma T. Leslie. This is meant in the highest praise. She even calls GTL "the most successful author of the modern age" (page 276 of my copy). I do wonder about what kind of world 'Fangirl' is set in. There is - if not a lawsuit - at least no debate over how similar 'Simon Snow' is to 'Harry Potter'. This could be considered parody, but there is no indication of that (and for this reason I didn't really care for the 'Simon' novel extracts in the story. But Cath's Simon/Baz Draco-in-Leather-Pants slash-fics are very nice and well-written). Though I guess there have been plenty of other franchises that were "inspired" by 'Harry Potter' and no lawsuit was made then =cough=MortalInstruments=cough=.
4. The lack of diversity I feel I should also mention. Everyone is white, and the one gay character is referred to only in a single chapter, and we are never actually introduced to him. True, Cath writes slash in her 'Simon Snow' fan fics - very decently I might add - but the fictional people in this book's universe are just that, fictional (in a story within a story), and they are only gay in non-canon. So I don't think they count as diverse, LGBT characters.
5. Levi once says he only occasionally washes his lank hair. Considering that he works at Starbucks, a food service cafe where hygiene is absolutely paramount, I find this hard to believe.
But you know what? These things can't ruin the ecstatic delight I felt when reading 'Fangirl'.
I love the fandom analysis aspect of this novel. Its message is that it's okay to get lost in fictional worlds and the characters inhabiting it, but be aware that there are all kinds of experiences to discover in the real world as well. Don't go so far as to avoid responsibilities and your insecurities. Cath Avery wants to avoid meeting new people when starting university, and the ones she reluctantly talks to can't understand her fixation on a pop culture icon - it's weird, kid's stuff to them. Her 'Simon Snow' fan fiction world, uni struggles, family and love life mix and come together in a cute package that is 'Fangirl', which is Cath's story.
And that's the great thing about it. Because not only is 'Fangirl' the first book I've read that understands the impact of fandom and how it brings people together, it also never forgets that its protagonist has a real life to deal with as well, with its own magic and pain.
At the start of the story, Cath is drifting apart from her once-close twin sister Wren. Her backstory is that her mother abandoned her, which coincided with 'Simon Snow' first taking off, and so began her escape from reality. She also constantly worries about home; about her father, who has bipolar disorder (never said, but his symptoms do reflect this).
At one point there is this heartbreaking scene, taking place in flashback:
'"I'm like him (Dad)," she'd whispered.
"You're not," Wren said.
"I am. I'm crazy like him." She was already having panic attacks. She was already hiding at parties...
"It's probably going to get worse in a few years. That's when it usually kicks in."
"You're not," Wren said.
"But what if I am?"
"Decide not to be."
"That's not how it works," Cath argued.
"Nobody knows how it works."
"What if I don't see it coming?"
"I'll see it coming."
Cath tried to stop crying, but she'd been crying so long, the crying had taken over, making her breathe in harsh sniffs and jerks.
"If it tries to take you," Wren said, "I won't let go."' - page 239-240 of my copy.
And on the same page:
'Their dad was home by then. And better. And Cath didn't feel, for the moment, like her DNA was a trap ready to snap closed on her' - page 240.
Slight typo aside, I love this scene. A sister desperately trying to comfort her beloved sibling, never letting go. That is, until university life takes over and Wren wants to meet new people and experience new things without having to worry about her dad, unlike Cath who still prefers to be a shut-in with her laptop and fan fiction.
This really struck a cord with me on a personal level. While I've never written any fan fiction myself, I've once read loads on Fanfiction.net, marveling at people's dedication to write down their own scenarios and interpretations of characters that already exist. There were definitely times in my young life where I preferred to make up stories in my head instead of admitting to and taking action against real problems. So I could relate to Cath and her situation very much.
I could especially relate to this:
'Cath couldn't control whether she saw Levi on campus. But she could worry about it, and as long as she was worrying about it, it probably wasn't going to happen. Like some sort of anxiety vaccine. Like watching a pot to make sure it never boiled.' - page 280.
Welcome to university!
Another favourite passage of mine:
'The professor leaned forward. "But there's nothing more profound than creating something out of nothing." Her lovely face turned fierce. "Think about it, Cath. That's what makes a god - or a mother. There's nothing more intoxicating than creating something from nothing. Creating something from yourself."' - page 275.
This. This is how I feel when I imagine and write down my own creations. And so 'Fangirl' could be a great teaching guide and confidence booster to get writers to write.
To conclude, 'Fangirl' is an adorably adorkable read, especially for those who love to look into pop culture like I do. But there is sadness to be found as well. And plenty of F-bombs and explicit details about sex also drop in (the main characters are of college-age, after all), so be warned, this cute book is not for children.
Topped off with multi-dimensional characters and plot points that intersect and reach a satisfying conclusion (in my opinion, anyway), 'Fangirl' is deserving of my five-star rating. Even the romance, which takes up most of the novel's second half over the fiction-writing and family subplots, is tolerable. It's highly unconventional for YA, and a sweet and realistic representation of a sheltered person's first (and, hopefully, only) love.
In my final score, however, 'Fangirl' loses .5 of a mark due to the few problems I had with it. But I'll treasure this forever, like all my pop culture obsessions I still won't grow out of. Both reality and fiction offer fun and unpredictable experiences in every way imaginable. Like the closure of a favourite book series, nothing has to truly end as long as people keep loving and cherishing it.
So yeah, consider me a fan of 'Fangirl'.
Final Score: 4.5/5
Nostalgic fondness aside, I think I've outgrown 'Fangirl'. I'm no longer a fan. Fare thee well, Cath and Wren.
Original review:
'... I'll read more and more and find that special 5-star quality book I've been starved of for months. You know that feeling you get after reading a great, awe-inspiring and wonderful book? I miss that...'
Have my prayers been answered? Barely a week after I posted this update on Goodreads and on my blog, I rated two books five stars. I'm on a roll! I can believe that books - classic and contemporary - are a thing of beauty again!
'Fangirl' - I love you. You are so absurdly adorable with your fandom interpretation and the meaning behind fan fiction and why people write it. With your coming-of-age tale about a girl, Cather "Cath" Avery, who's beginning her adult life - when in all her childhood and teen years she's been escaping into fantasy reading and online fan forums as a clutch to avoid feeling the effects of a traumatic incident in her family. With your fan fiction and "novel" extracts before the beginning of each chapter, which reflect on how Cath's own life and relationships with others will play out (such as on the theme of betrayal). And with your unbelievably believable, fleshed-out characters. Reading the stark personalities of Levi, Reagan and Cath's dad Art was all at once bittersweet and a joy.
'Fangirl' - you are so damn cute I want to hug you to infinity and beyond.
However, like everything in life, you do have problems. Minor issues really, and maybe it's just me, but I'll list them anyway, and get them out of the way quickly (Not-very-good university tutor mode coming on now):
1. Even if you are aware that you are repeating phrases, reading about Levi brushing his hair back with his hands/fingers and about his millions of smiles did get tiresome after a bit. Same with Cath and Wren constantly rolling their eyes over the slightest thing. Over-usage of the same romantic prose and words ("just" springs to mind) are what put me off romance novels in general. 'Fangirl' , you are very creative, just not so much in the language department.
2. Is there a thing now in YA where the protagonist's mother is not only absent or uninvolved, but is a terrible and selfish person who deliberately abandons her children at the worst possible time? 'My Sister Lives on the Mantelpiece' comes to mind. Though this device did help me to understand more of Cath's pain and confusion over a reality she doesn't wish to go back to.
3. 'Harry Potter' exists in the same universe as 'Fangirl' (as shown in one line of Levi's). And yet the clear rip-off series, 'Simon Snow' - about an eleven-year-old orphan boy sent to a magic school and makes friends and deadly enemies - seemingly has the most recognition and success. The first 'Harry Potter' book was published in 1997; 'Simon Snow' in 2001. It is specifically stated in 'Fangirl' that 'Simon Snow' is a global phenomenon, in both the literary and film industries (and, of course, in fandom). Professor Piper - a university professor - mentions that not everyone can write like the author of the 'Simon Snow' series, Gemma T. Leslie. This is meant in the highest praise. She even calls GTL "the most successful author of the modern age" (page 276 of my copy). I do wonder about what kind of world 'Fangirl' is set in. There is - if not a lawsuit - at least no debate over how similar 'Simon Snow' is to 'Harry Potter'. This could be considered parody, but there is no indication of that (and for this reason I didn't really care for the 'Simon' novel extracts in the story. But Cath's Simon/Baz Draco-in-Leather-Pants slash-fics are very nice and well-written). Though I guess there have been plenty of other franchises that were "inspired" by 'Harry Potter' and no lawsuit was made then =cough=MortalInstruments=cough=.
4. The lack of diversity I feel I should also mention. Everyone is white, and the one gay character is referred to only in a single chapter, and we are never actually introduced to him. True, Cath writes slash in her 'Simon Snow' fan fics - very decently I might add - but the fictional people in this book's universe are just that, fictional (in a story within a story), and they are only gay in non-canon. So I don't think they count as diverse, LGBT characters.
5. Levi once says he only occasionally washes his lank hair. Considering that he works at Starbucks, a food service cafe where hygiene is absolutely paramount, I find this hard to believe.
But you know what? These things can't ruin the ecstatic delight I felt when reading 'Fangirl'.
I love the fandom analysis aspect of this novel. Its message is that it's okay to get lost in fictional worlds and the characters inhabiting it, but be aware that there are all kinds of experiences to discover in the real world as well. Don't go so far as to avoid responsibilities and your insecurities. Cath Avery wants to avoid meeting new people when starting university, and the ones she reluctantly talks to can't understand her fixation on a pop culture icon - it's weird, kid's stuff to them. Her 'Simon Snow' fan fiction world, uni struggles, family and love life mix and come together in a cute package that is 'Fangirl', which is Cath's story.
And that's the great thing about it. Because not only is 'Fangirl' the first book I've read that understands the impact of fandom and how it brings people together, it also never forgets that its protagonist has a real life to deal with as well, with its own magic and pain.
At the start of the story, Cath is drifting apart from her once-close twin sister Wren. Her backstory is that her mother abandoned her, which coincided with 'Simon Snow' first taking off, and so began her escape from reality. She also constantly worries about home; about her father, who has bipolar disorder (never said, but his symptoms do reflect this).
At one point there is this heartbreaking scene, taking place in flashback:
'"I'm like him (Dad)," she'd whispered.
"You're not," Wren said.
"I am. I'm crazy like him." She was already having panic attacks. She was already hiding at parties...
"It's probably going to get worse in a few years. That's when it usually kicks in."
"You're not," Wren said.
"But what if I am?"
"Decide not to be."
"That's not how it works," Cath argued.
"Nobody knows how it works."
"What if I don't see it coming?"
"I'll see it coming."
Cath tried to stop crying, but she'd been crying so long, the crying had taken over, making her breathe in harsh sniffs and jerks.
"If it tries to take you," Wren said, "I won't let go."' - page 239-240 of my copy.
And on the same page:
'Their dad was home by then. And better. And Cath didn't feel, for the moment, like her DNA was a trap ready to snap closed on her' - page 240.
Slight typo aside, I love this scene. A sister desperately trying to comfort her beloved sibling, never letting go. That is, until university life takes over and Wren wants to meet new people and experience new things without having to worry about her dad, unlike Cath who still prefers to be a shut-in with her laptop and fan fiction.
This really struck a cord with me on a personal level. While I've never written any fan fiction myself, I've once read loads on Fanfiction.net, marveling at people's dedication to write down their own scenarios and interpretations of characters that already exist. There were definitely times in my young life where I preferred to make up stories in my head instead of admitting to and taking action against real problems. So I could relate to Cath and her situation very much.
I could especially relate to this:
'Cath couldn't control whether she saw Levi on campus. But she could worry about it, and as long as she was worrying about it, it probably wasn't going to happen. Like some sort of anxiety vaccine. Like watching a pot to make sure it never boiled.' - page 280.
Welcome to university!
Another favourite passage of mine:
'The professor leaned forward. "But there's nothing more profound than creating something out of nothing." Her lovely face turned fierce. "Think about it, Cath. That's what makes a god - or a mother. There's nothing more intoxicating than creating something from nothing. Creating something from yourself."' - page 275.
This. This is how I feel when I imagine and write down my own creations. And so 'Fangirl' could be a great teaching guide and confidence booster to get writers to write.
To conclude, 'Fangirl' is an adorably adorkable read, especially for those who love to look into pop culture like I do. But there is sadness to be found as well. And plenty of F-bombs and explicit details about sex also drop in (the main characters are of college-age, after all), so be warned, this cute book is not for children.
Topped off with multi-dimensional characters and plot points that intersect and reach a satisfying conclusion (in my opinion, anyway), 'Fangirl' is deserving of my five-star rating. Even the romance, which takes up most of the novel's second half over the fiction-writing and family subplots, is tolerable. It's highly unconventional for YA, and a sweet and realistic representation of a sheltered person's first (and, hopefully, only) love.
In my final score, however, 'Fangirl' loses .5 of a mark due to the few problems I had with it. But I'll treasure this forever, like all my pop culture obsessions I still won't grow out of. Both reality and fiction offer fun and unpredictable experiences in every way imaginable. Like the closure of a favourite book series, nothing has to truly end as long as people keep loving and cherishing it.
So yeah, consider me a fan of 'Fangirl'.
Final Score: 4.5/5
Tuesday, 4 March 2014
Book Review - 'Sophie's World' by Jostein Gaarder
2020 EDIT: No longer one of my favourites, sadly, as I didn't enjoy it the more I read it on the second go. I skimmed through A LOT of dense, tedious infodumping. But I still appreciate 'Sophie's World'. It is fascinating, but dry in its complex philosophical and historical teachings. I really must have been as patient as a saint when I was younger; I reckon I'm not so patient now. A sign of lost innocence on my part? Maybe I'm the dull one in my disillusioned adulthood.
In 'Sophie's World', I've noticed a few inconsistencies and contradictions. It reads as a bit pretentious to me now. Plus the ending has some disturbing implications.
Nonetheless, I'm glad I read it. It opened my eyes and made me appreciate more things than I would have before in my life. I do still try to remain thoughtful, open minded and free thinking. And feminism is touched upon - I can't believe I missed out on that the first time! 'Sophie's World' is about progress, but the execution of its millions of ideas and subject matters that are introduced is another kettle of fish.
Whatever anyone may think of 'Sophie's World', it does make you think, which is no doubt the intention.
Final Score: 3.5/5
Original Review:
A wonderful, informative book about the history of humankind trying to discover and understand its own existence.
A cynical look at man, mind, matter, and consciousness.
A story book about philosophy.
A philosophy book with a story.
A story within a story.
There is no story.
A beautifully crafted tale full of twists and turns.
A clumsy mess of a plot trying to teach philosophy to a new generation.
An amazing, intellectual feat with reflections of self-awareness, irony and integrity.
A colossal mind-screw.
A work of art and genius.
An overly-long and awkward clusterfuck of too many different ideas at once.
A novel that teaches us how balance and forward-thinking are everything for mankind to continue to survive and thrive.
But what about it seemingly never making up its own mind about whether it wants to be a story about philosophy, or a history of philosophy book?
'Sophie's World' is all of these things and more. And I loved every page of it.
By the time I was finished with it, I was exhausted, and well-informed about philosophy and the limitless potential of creative storytelling. Like Sophie herself, I was left wondering: Why don't more schools teach children about philosophy and the boundless ways we can look at the world and therefore change it for the better? Why was it that in my university Performing Arts course, I was taught more about philosophy than about performing arts?
I'd say 'Sophie's World' is a very important book to read because, like feminism and imagination, philosophy is something that needs more recognition and understanding in our modern world. What truly makes human beings so fascinating is that each and every one of us has the capacity to think outside the box, to break away from society's monotonous routines and expectations. With the power of independent thought, anyone can be a philosopher. The first step is understanding its meaning, and that there are no limits in its field.
But storywise, what really connected me to 'Sophie's World' was the realism of the characters. Sophie Amundsen is a fourteen-year-old Norwegian schoolgirl who finds two mysterious notes in her postbox one day, saying "Who are you?" and "Where does the world come from?" She is an inquisitive, adventurous and lovely protagonist (or not, as will be questioned when the big twist of the story is known). She possesses hopes and fears and doubts: similar to how any young starting philosopher would feel. Sophie can be mean and reckless sometimes, but she is still a teenager just coming to understand what the non-deep-thinking adult world is like. I could sympathise with her frustration at others; who go about their lives not questioning anything, not wishing for something more, and never working towards their potential. Her relationship with her mother in particular is quite endearing, with more complicated subtext than how it first appears. Reading about how its development plays out was very interesting to me.
'Sophie's World' brings up how children, in their playfulness and freedom, are more curious and imaginative than grown-ups; similar to the theme of Antoine de Saint-Exupery's 'The Little Prince'.
The rest of the characters are not very likeable. Alberto Knox is a philosophy nut, but is also a creepy stalker of a fourteen-year-old girl. Joanna is a faux best friend who makes Sophie feel bad about herself, and yet the blame is on Sophie. It's indicated that Joanna's spoiled personality stems from her being raised by shallow and irresponsible parents, and that Alberto's actions are not entirely his own; so he will try to break away from his "god". So while they may not be likeable, neither of these two are ill-developed nor are they pointless to the book's purpose.
There are a few other characters who will come to light as the novel progresses; ones who are as remarkable as Sophie, and I'm not talking about the philosophers throughout the ages such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Spinoza, Humes, Locke, Kant, Marx and Freud.
In terms of plot, the novel definitely has plenty of action and cause-and-effect. It's not all a history lesson. Like I mentioned, Sophie is an explorer who has adventures and comes across mysteries, Nancy Drew-style. There are stakes, such as the ticking clock of Sophie having to learn about the whole history of philosophy before her fifteenth birthday; for something of great consequence is about to happen. Something life changing. What will it be? Read to find out.
There's also a subtext about men looking out for their daughters. Sophie's father is away throughout the entirety of the book, and so Alberto Knox is her only male role model/teacher. I can't really explain any further without giving away major spoilers, but it could be that 'Sophie's World', underneath all its teachings about the importance and relevance of philosophy with mind-warping elements mixed in, is at the end of the day a simple story about an absentee father trying to reconcile with his young daughter, just as she is growing out of innocence and into ignorance. It's a sweet little message for such a complex novel.
The characters and the way the story is structured are what keep 'Sophie's World' from becoming just a textbook of philosophy and history. These two subjects are important to help us understand the world today. However, since 'Sophie's World' is supposedly a starting point for young aspiring philosophers, it helps that a layer of fiction/fairy tales is also prevalent.
There are little touches here and there to delight and set young readers' imaginations going. These include: the Lego/world-creating comparison (very nostalgic and relevant, and I read this at the time of the release of 'The Lego Movie' as well!); the strange inclusions of Alice in Wonderland, Little Red Riding Hood and Winnie the Pooh (I'm not making this up); the "romantic irony" which tells us that the characters (specifically Alberto Knox) know they are in a story (what we would call "meta-humour" today); the videotape showing ancient Athens; the "magic mirror" between worlds; and Alberto dressing in costumes relating to a time period where philosophy had set a new revolution - in order to teach Sophie about how humans had thought and were educated about self-discovery (internally and externally) in that era. After all, children learn more from seeing than hearing.
'Sophie's World' reminds me of why I love to read. Fiction can teach you more about life than textbooks, which, while not necessarily dull, can be very restrictive in learning and development. This book teaches you to think any way you like about humanity, the world and the very universe itself. Did everything start with the Big Bang? Is there an all-mighty and omnipresent God who created all of space and time, and the whole world and the life on it? Did God come from nothing? Did the universe come from nothing? Has it always existed? Has matter always existed? What about nature vs nurture, my favourite discussion topic?
And where do we go with these questions? How do we create and project ourselves onto the ever-mysterious world we live on?
'Sophie's World' is a thinking and speculative reading experience that trusts in its audience's intelligence, like many good literary works do. I did not believe it to be pretentious or even that convoluted; there's a beating heart in this novel about philosophy. I'd go so far as to say it is the best title in the magical realism genre I've ever read. Heck, its mind-scrambling surrealism and layers of subtle subtext would make it worthy of a Coen brother film adaptation.
I like to look deep into the things I read about, and no doubt I show this in a lot of my reviews. This is because I like to think, and because I like to trust in the writer's passion and dedication to create something meaningful and beautiful with his or her story and characters. A written intent that is so powerful that it can perhaps help me to think differently from how I thought before.
I knew about the basics of philosophy before reading 'Sophie's World', but not so much the history of it, nor the hundreds of figureheads who contribute to the way we think and act to this day. This bizarre, confusing yet brilliant masterpiece definitely made me think about all kinds of things during and after reading. It's an eye-opener, a consciousness-awakener, a mirror into the dividing nature of the mind and soul.
And that's what I look for in what I call a "beautiful, five-star quality story".
Of course, like all the philosophers of the past and present, 'Sophie's World' doesn't really go so far as to provide any concrete answers to life's billions of questions. A true philosopher cannot claim to be all-knowing or wise (as Socrates once stated) - he/she can only speculate, create and explore the possibilities of life's meaning. If it has one.
Filled with great teachings (as a start to learning about philosophy) and with real and wonderful characters and environments, I recommend 'Sophie's World' wholeheartedly. Not everyone will love it, that much is certain, with all its many ideas and seemingly random turnabouts (especially towards the somewhat anticlimactic end of Sophie's journey). But it is an experience to behold nonetheless.
It's a novel that thinks it's a history of philosophy.
It's a history of philosophy that thinks it's a novel.
Book reviewer Artemis Crescent thinks it's a little of both of these things. How they balance out in relation to one another is entirely up to the curious, free-thinking reader.
Final Score: 4.5/5
In 'Sophie's World', I've noticed a few inconsistencies and contradictions. It reads as a bit pretentious to me now. Plus the ending has some disturbing implications.
Nonetheless, I'm glad I read it. It opened my eyes and made me appreciate more things than I would have before in my life. I do still try to remain thoughtful, open minded and free thinking. And feminism is touched upon - I can't believe I missed out on that the first time! 'Sophie's World' is about progress, but the execution of its millions of ideas and subject matters that are introduced is another kettle of fish.
Whatever anyone may think of 'Sophie's World', it does make you think, which is no doubt the intention.
Final Score: 3.5/5
Original Review:
A wonderful, informative book about the history of humankind trying to discover and understand its own existence.
A cynical look at man, mind, matter, and consciousness.
A story book about philosophy.
A philosophy book with a story.
A story within a story.
There is no story.
A beautifully crafted tale full of twists and turns.
A clumsy mess of a plot trying to teach philosophy to a new generation.
An amazing, intellectual feat with reflections of self-awareness, irony and integrity.
A colossal mind-screw.
A work of art and genius.
An overly-long and awkward clusterfuck of too many different ideas at once.
A novel that teaches us how balance and forward-thinking are everything for mankind to continue to survive and thrive.
But what about it seemingly never making up its own mind about whether it wants to be a story about philosophy, or a history of philosophy book?
'Sophie's World' is all of these things and more. And I loved every page of it.
By the time I was finished with it, I was exhausted, and well-informed about philosophy and the limitless potential of creative storytelling. Like Sophie herself, I was left wondering: Why don't more schools teach children about philosophy and the boundless ways we can look at the world and therefore change it for the better? Why was it that in my university Performing Arts course, I was taught more about philosophy than about performing arts?
I'd say 'Sophie's World' is a very important book to read because, like feminism and imagination, philosophy is something that needs more recognition and understanding in our modern world. What truly makes human beings so fascinating is that each and every one of us has the capacity to think outside the box, to break away from society's monotonous routines and expectations. With the power of independent thought, anyone can be a philosopher. The first step is understanding its meaning, and that there are no limits in its field.
But storywise, what really connected me to 'Sophie's World' was the realism of the characters. Sophie Amundsen is a fourteen-year-old Norwegian schoolgirl who finds two mysterious notes in her postbox one day, saying "Who are you?" and "Where does the world come from?" She is an inquisitive, adventurous and lovely protagonist (or not, as will be questioned when the big twist of the story is known). She possesses hopes and fears and doubts: similar to how any young starting philosopher would feel. Sophie can be mean and reckless sometimes, but she is still a teenager just coming to understand what the non-deep-thinking adult world is like. I could sympathise with her frustration at others; who go about their lives not questioning anything, not wishing for something more, and never working towards their potential. Her relationship with her mother in particular is quite endearing, with more complicated subtext than how it first appears. Reading about how its development plays out was very interesting to me.
'Sophie's World' brings up how children, in their playfulness and freedom, are more curious and imaginative than grown-ups; similar to the theme of Antoine de Saint-Exupery's 'The Little Prince'.
The rest of the characters are not very likeable. Alberto Knox is a philosophy nut, but is also a creepy stalker of a fourteen-year-old girl. Joanna is a faux best friend who makes Sophie feel bad about herself, and yet the blame is on Sophie. It's indicated that Joanna's spoiled personality stems from her being raised by shallow and irresponsible parents, and that Alberto's actions are not entirely his own; so he will try to break away from his "god". So while they may not be likeable, neither of these two are ill-developed nor are they pointless to the book's purpose.
There are a few other characters who will come to light as the novel progresses; ones who are as remarkable as Sophie, and I'm not talking about the philosophers throughout the ages such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Spinoza, Humes, Locke, Kant, Marx and Freud.
In terms of plot, the novel definitely has plenty of action and cause-and-effect. It's not all a history lesson. Like I mentioned, Sophie is an explorer who has adventures and comes across mysteries, Nancy Drew-style. There are stakes, such as the ticking clock of Sophie having to learn about the whole history of philosophy before her fifteenth birthday; for something of great consequence is about to happen. Something life changing. What will it be? Read to find out.
There's also a subtext about men looking out for their daughters. Sophie's father is away throughout the entirety of the book, and so Alberto Knox is her only male role model/teacher. I can't really explain any further without giving away major spoilers, but it could be that 'Sophie's World', underneath all its teachings about the importance and relevance of philosophy with mind-warping elements mixed in, is at the end of the day a simple story about an absentee father trying to reconcile with his young daughter, just as she is growing out of innocence and into ignorance. It's a sweet little message for such a complex novel.
The characters and the way the story is structured are what keep 'Sophie's World' from becoming just a textbook of philosophy and history. These two subjects are important to help us understand the world today. However, since 'Sophie's World' is supposedly a starting point for young aspiring philosophers, it helps that a layer of fiction/fairy tales is also prevalent.
There are little touches here and there to delight and set young readers' imaginations going. These include: the Lego/world-creating comparison (very nostalgic and relevant, and I read this at the time of the release of 'The Lego Movie' as well!); the strange inclusions of Alice in Wonderland, Little Red Riding Hood and Winnie the Pooh (I'm not making this up); the "romantic irony" which tells us that the characters (specifically Alberto Knox) know they are in a story (what we would call "meta-humour" today); the videotape showing ancient Athens; the "magic mirror" between worlds; and Alberto dressing in costumes relating to a time period where philosophy had set a new revolution - in order to teach Sophie about how humans had thought and were educated about self-discovery (internally and externally) in that era. After all, children learn more from seeing than hearing.
'Sophie's World' reminds me of why I love to read. Fiction can teach you more about life than textbooks, which, while not necessarily dull, can be very restrictive in learning and development. This book teaches you to think any way you like about humanity, the world and the very universe itself. Did everything start with the Big Bang? Is there an all-mighty and omnipresent God who created all of space and time, and the whole world and the life on it? Did God come from nothing? Did the universe come from nothing? Has it always existed? Has matter always existed? What about nature vs nurture, my favourite discussion topic?
And where do we go with these questions? How do we create and project ourselves onto the ever-mysterious world we live on?
'Sophie's World' is a thinking and speculative reading experience that trusts in its audience's intelligence, like many good literary works do. I did not believe it to be pretentious or even that convoluted; there's a beating heart in this novel about philosophy. I'd go so far as to say it is the best title in the magical realism genre I've ever read. Heck, its mind-scrambling surrealism and layers of subtle subtext would make it worthy of a Coen brother film adaptation.
I like to look deep into the things I read about, and no doubt I show this in a lot of my reviews. This is because I like to think, and because I like to trust in the writer's passion and dedication to create something meaningful and beautiful with his or her story and characters. A written intent that is so powerful that it can perhaps help me to think differently from how I thought before.
I knew about the basics of philosophy before reading 'Sophie's World', but not so much the history of it, nor the hundreds of figureheads who contribute to the way we think and act to this day. This bizarre, confusing yet brilliant masterpiece definitely made me think about all kinds of things during and after reading. It's an eye-opener, a consciousness-awakener, a mirror into the dividing nature of the mind and soul.
And that's what I look for in what I call a "beautiful, five-star quality story".
Of course, like all the philosophers of the past and present, 'Sophie's World' doesn't really go so far as to provide any concrete answers to life's billions of questions. A true philosopher cannot claim to be all-knowing or wise (as Socrates once stated) - he/she can only speculate, create and explore the possibilities of life's meaning. If it has one.
Filled with great teachings (as a start to learning about philosophy) and with real and wonderful characters and environments, I recommend 'Sophie's World' wholeheartedly. Not everyone will love it, that much is certain, with all its many ideas and seemingly random turnabouts (especially towards the somewhat anticlimactic end of Sophie's journey). But it is an experience to behold nonetheless.
It's a novel that thinks it's a history of philosophy.
It's a history of philosophy that thinks it's a novel.
Book reviewer Artemis Crescent thinks it's a little of both of these things. How they balance out in relation to one another is entirely up to the curious, free-thinking reader.
Final Score: 4.5/5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)