And now that the true nature of Magical Girls is revealed, Kyuubey has his nightmare face on every panel he's in.
Great ending to a great series. There were things in this manga that I didn't think about when I watched the anime - it highlighted certain ideas and expressed new themes!
The characters truly shine here and it's amazing to see how far they will go to achieve what they want. The sacrifices made are genuinely tragic; I adore these magical but human girls.
And I've come to accept that not every panel is going to imitate the anime, because the artwork and the emotion put into it is heart-wrenching all on its own.
I also have to talk about a certain trope that relates to 'Madoka Magica' in regards to feminism:
Too often in movies, TV series and books, whenever a woman or a girl-becoming-a-woman is made powerful and is supposedly highly intelligent, it is a mandatory rule that she must go insane. She can't keep so much mental and emotional responsibility under control without a man by her side. I think this stems from a misogynistic world viewpoint that females can't handle adulthood - they must stay innocent and pure and young, so that men can protect them always (after all, to call a grown woman a girl is considered a compliment mostly, whilst calling a man a boy is widely seen as an insult). Also, this implies that men are not allowed to be emotional - or heck, human - in mainstream culture.
Without giving away spoilers, 'Madoka Magica' does present this trope... kind of. But in the case of this franchise it actually makes sense - to the concept and the plot. Besides, as it contains an abundance of three-dimensional female characters who are strong in their own way, a slip-up like this is easily forgivable. To me anyway.
Full of twists and turns and inevitable outcomes, I got teary-eyed all over again. 'Madoka Magica' is brilliantly-written, thought-provoking and beautiful.
A dark and perfect Magical Girl story.
Final Score: 5/5
Monday 30 September 2013
Manga Review - 'Puella Magi Madoka Magica, Vol 2' by Magica Quartet, Hanokage
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a Magical Girl."
The second volume of the 'Madoka Magica' manga covers episodes 5 - 8 of the anime. Here we get to know Kyouko Sakura, and explore Sayaka Miki's reflections and devastation. And just who is Homura Akemi? The stakes get higher and the truth about Magical Girls is revealed.
It misses a star because I felt that it did not manage to cover the little but important details - both in the narrative and the art. But I still enjoyed this, and I can't wait to read the third and final volume.
Also, that last page will give me nightmares.
Final Score: 4/5
The second volume of the 'Madoka Magica' manga covers episodes 5 - 8 of the anime. Here we get to know Kyouko Sakura, and explore Sayaka Miki's reflections and devastation. And just who is Homura Akemi? The stakes get higher and the truth about Magical Girls is revealed.
It misses a star because I felt that it did not manage to cover the little but important details - both in the narrative and the art. But I still enjoyed this, and I can't wait to read the third and final volume.
Also, that last page will give me nightmares.
Final Score: 4/5
Non-Fiction Book Review - 'Wicked: The Grimmerie' by David Cote, Stephen Schwartz, Joan Marcus, Winnie Holzman
Informative, colourful, pretty, brilliant. A bit dated for 2005, but that shouldn't matter in the least, not for any fan of 'Wicked'.
And I am a HUGE fan of 'Wicked'. I love the songs, the characters, the story, the set pieces. I love it as much as 'The Wizard of Oz', the movie. I went to see it with my family in London on my 21st birthday. Best day ever.
Even children and adults who don't like Broadway shows love Wicked (including my dad), and it's not hard to see why. Its appeal is universal, because it contains universal themes - such as loneliness, friendship, dictatorship, corruption, love, and wanting to be accepted by everyone. And it looks awesome. It has true magical power.
I don't like to use the word "perfect" often, but I am sure Wicked is the perfect musical.
It's funny, because I am definitely NOT a fan of the original book by Gregory Maguire, even though I read it before I saw the stage show. It is my opinion that the musical FAR exceeds the book in almost every way - particularly with character motivations, explanations (something a prequel to an existing work should have), heart and passion, and just being a better structured story. The book was too soulless for me; that the musical fixes this further proves that it is a magical miracle. However I know that I can't really hate the original source material since the Broadway show wouldn't exist without it.
So back to 'The Grimmerie': it is a precious possession for any 'Wicked' fan. The section 'Fan Letters' especially touched me, as it shows what a huge effect 'Wicked' has had on different people.
It will continue to have an impact throughout many generations.
'Wicked: The Grimmerie' - I prefer this book to Maguire's, I'm afraid. It is wonderful. It made me sentimental. It reminds me of why I love musicals.
A great companion to a show that has changed people's lives for the good.
Final Score: 5/5
And I am a HUGE fan of 'Wicked'. I love the songs, the characters, the story, the set pieces. I love it as much as 'The Wizard of Oz', the movie. I went to see it with my family in London on my 21st birthday. Best day ever.
Even children and adults who don't like Broadway shows love Wicked (including my dad), and it's not hard to see why. Its appeal is universal, because it contains universal themes - such as loneliness, friendship, dictatorship, corruption, love, and wanting to be accepted by everyone. And it looks awesome. It has true magical power.
I don't like to use the word "perfect" often, but I am sure Wicked is the perfect musical.
It's funny, because I am definitely NOT a fan of the original book by Gregory Maguire, even though I read it before I saw the stage show. It is my opinion that the musical FAR exceeds the book in almost every way - particularly with character motivations, explanations (something a prequel to an existing work should have), heart and passion, and just being a better structured story. The book was too soulless for me; that the musical fixes this further proves that it is a magical miracle. However I know that I can't really hate the original source material since the Broadway show wouldn't exist without it.
So back to 'The Grimmerie': it is a precious possession for any 'Wicked' fan. The section 'Fan Letters' especially touched me, as it shows what a huge effect 'Wicked' has had on different people.
It will continue to have an impact throughout many generations.
'Wicked: The Grimmerie' - I prefer this book to Maguire's, I'm afraid. It is wonderful. It made me sentimental. It reminds me of why I love musicals.
A great companion to a show that has changed people's lives for the good.
Final Score: 5/5
Non-Fiction Book Review - 'Avenue Q: The Book' by Zachary Pincus-Roth, Carol Rosegg (Photographer)
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:
I adore 'Avenue Q', so naturally I enjoyed reading about what went on behind the scenes (I always want to know the behind-the-scenes of everything, but that's beside the point).
I saw the Broadway show for my performing arts course a few years ago. It's an ingenious adult take on Sesame Street, about the perils of growing up compared to how simple life was for everyone when they're a kid.
Political incorrectness has never looked less meanspirited. That's what I love about 'Avenue Q' - it's genuinely clever and hilarious, with a lot of heart thrown in with the "it's so true" sense of humour. The songs are really catchy as well, as performed by puppets!
The book is as colourful and funny as the characters in the show. My one gripe is the cover material. While it's a cute idea, it's so messy! I can't take it out of the plastic wrapping that came with it without the fur getting everywhere.
But the inside is informative and humorous. I could tell that everyone involved in the production of 'Avenue Q' had fun whilst putting it on Broadway for the first time.
It was a risk that paid off.
Final Score: 4/5
Final Score: 3.5/5
Original Review:
I adore 'Avenue Q', so naturally I enjoyed reading about what went on behind the scenes (I always want to know the behind-the-scenes of everything, but that's beside the point).
I saw the Broadway show for my performing arts course a few years ago. It's an ingenious adult take on Sesame Street, about the perils of growing up compared to how simple life was for everyone when they're a kid.
Political incorrectness has never looked less meanspirited. That's what I love about 'Avenue Q' - it's genuinely clever and hilarious, with a lot of heart thrown in with the "it's so true" sense of humour. The songs are really catchy as well, as performed by puppets!
The book is as colourful and funny as the characters in the show. My one gripe is the cover material. While it's a cute idea, it's so messy! I can't take it out of the plastic wrapping that came with it without the fur getting everywhere.
But the inside is informative and humorous. I could tell that everyone involved in the production of 'Avenue Q' had fun whilst putting it on Broadway for the first time.
It was a risk that paid off.
Final Score: 4/5
Book Review - 'Croak' by Gina Damico
2021 EDIT: 'Croak' is a very funny, yet tragic and gory, and imaginative YA fantasy book. The very premise of a teenage Grim Reaper is still great.
Unfortunately, like many of my rereads this year, I've spotted more than a few problems with it, that I somehow missed on my first read (was I doused in that black widow spider silk, Amnesia, too?).
The ableist R-word is said twice - this is a 2012 book, there is no excuse. Most of the characters are fun, hilarious and endearing, although they are petty, catty, jealous, childish, territorial and conservative people (the main, important characters who get the most page time are also white). Plus it feels like the author was trying too hard to make them like 'Buffy' archetypes, and the snarky humour isn't always placed in the most suitable and appropriate situations. I don't understand why Lex, the hardened and cynical loner protagonist, would fall in love with Croak and feel like she belongs there and gets along with everyone, when most of the time she is treated like a suspicious outsider, a freak, and eventually a criminal suspect.
There's the implication that murder is the absolute worst thing that a human can do - that makes them "real monsters" - and that rape and even child molestation belong in the same category of crimes as theft and fraud. A child abuse victim is vilified. 'Croak' is no stranger to un-self-aware girl-on-girl hate over a boy, feminine shaming, and slut shaming, either. Nor is it above perpetuating, unconsciously or not, stereotypical nuclear family dynamics (Lex's father is cool, calm, collected and reasonable, and her mother is fretful, overbearing, and bakes cookies. SERIOUSLY?)
Then there's the romance: I was not into it this time. It has nothing to do with how Lex and Driggs literally, physically hurt each other at the beginning - in fact, between these two OTT hotheads in a story and setting like this, with a tone like this, it actually comes across as legitimately funny - and their banter is witty and creative most of the time. It's just that their constant bickering and hostility towards one another can get too much after a while. Even boring and predictable. The biggest damage of all is when Driggs calls Lex an abomination and a freak (page 201), and had clearly thought that of her (and thought her to be dangerous and untrustworthy) throughout the rest of the book; this explosive deliverance comes right before the two think about making out for the first time, and Driggs never apologises to Lex, as far as I remember. Also, it is revealed at the very end that he is a creepy stalker, and always had been. Effing wonderful. I seriously don't buy that they are true, loving soulmates.
I hate Ferbus. He's a pillock. A gigantic prick. A useless, hypocritical wannabe Ron Weasley, with nary the same charm, humour, and courage. And I'm quite disappointed that he will never in this series come out of that closet he is so obviously in, where he suffocates in Narnia.
Some padding and meandering from the murder mystery plot is present throughout the middle and near the end, as well.
I just don't think I want to revisit this world and series - not when I would have to deal with the childish, pathetic rakes and Creatures of the Black Lagoon that are Norwood and Heloise (who really despise kids, specifically Junior Grims, for no explained reason). And knowing how this mess will end.
Sorry, I guess I'm giving up. But I'm glad to have experienced 'Croak' all the same. It's a novelty: a YA series starring a female protagonist with a dark side, who's a real antiheroine, and where there's no love triangle (unless you count the Lex-Driggs-Sofi triangle, which is so minor, extraneous and forgettable you wonder why it was included in the story in the first place); it definitely has that going for it.
Final Score: 3.5/5
P.S: How did I ever miss that the girl on the cover looks nothing like how Lex is described in the book? Personally, I prefer the unique and cool semblance of cover girl.
Original Review:
Premise: Teenage girl Grim Reaper.
Stop right there. You've already won me over.
'Croak' is a story about sixteen-year-old Lexington Bartleby, who after beating up more of her fellow school students (not shown, but the book cuts to the chase) is forced to move away for the summer to her uncle's farm, to learn to appreciate life and hard work.
Uncle Mort actually lives in a strange town called Croak, which Lex learns is home to higher-up and trainee soul reapers, or "Killers". Uncle Mort wants Lex to continue the family business, for he trusts in her capabilities.
As it turns out, she is a natural born Killer, and quite powerful. Is this a reason for her anger issues in the past two years? (She used to be very well-behaved.) Just how powerful is she? And Lex is not an ideal role model - she's practically a delinquent - so how far will she go with her powers, by her own choice?
I will list all the things that 'Croak' by Gina Damico is. It is:
1. One of the funniest and most fun books I've ever read, YA or otherwise. Seriously, the dialogue is a hoot!
2. Clever and creative. One road in the spooky town is called 'Dead End' among other humourous names for its streets and local hangouts. The afterlife depicted is both awe-inspiring and funny as... heaven.
3. Simply written and fast paced. The style is slick and punchy, if such words can be used to describe prose.
4. Great for 'Harry Potter' fans or for anyone who wants to move on from it.
5. Home to funny and complex characters. Lex is cartoonishly aggressive. But she is snarky and very witty, and gets called out on her behaviour, unlike another heroine in a YA book I won't name (*cough*EyesLikeStars*cough*). She is aware of her own flaws, and despite her violent tendencies she really is like a normal teenage girl, and she can kick butt all the way to Kingdom come. Driggs, her roommate living with Uncle Mort as his "pool guy", is probably the only boy I know, in both fiction and real life, who likes the film 'Titanic'. He's overconfident, but he's as full of snark, flaws and of a short temper as Lex, and they get along splendidly together. Their relationship is given time to develop before it becomes something more than teasing and petty squabbling and them being one another's emotional and physical punching bags. Other characters like Uncle Mort, Zara and Elysia are also interesting and likeable. They all serve a purpose to the story - which is both a mystery and a coming-of-age journey for Lex.
6. A mixture of black comedy and just plain dark storytelling. Really, the descriptions of the dead bodies that Lex encounters in her "Killing" errands are gruesome. There is horror here, as well as moral issues presented: such as letting a murderer go free to kill others, as the reapers' only job is to collect souls to send to the afterlife in a bank vault (just roll with it) in the Croak town. This YA novel has a backbone, as well as fully-realised and inventive world building.
7. Something that can be imagined as an anime while reading, especially during the over-the-top violent and/or hilarious moments (in the first chapter, Lex's mother ties her to a chair with rope just so she would have no choice but to sit down and listen to her parents - classic).
8. A first in a series, so there are as many unanswered questions as there are answered ones, and there are - big shock - secretive adults. While some mysteries are obvious, 'Croak' is still a gripping read, as it keeps you wondering HOW Lex and her friends are going to get to the bottom of a plot involving mysterious deaths occurring unnaturally around the world.
9. Above all it's, surprisingly, very touching and sad. The climax is bold, and leaves me wanting more. Things get more intense and dramatic - Lex will have to make genuinely hard decisions that affect not only herself, but the people she has learned to appreciate and love.
10. And it's everything I didn't get from Rachel Vincent's 'My Soul To Take' - for reasons listed above.
What 'Croak' is NOT:
1. A YA novel that uses a love triangle to try to create conflict and drama (no love triangle exists here - yey!).
2. A YA novel with a weak and dumb damsel-in-distress heroine. Lex can take care of herself and does have common sense. And slight spoiler: when she is held captive at the end of the book, she saves herself; with no external help from others. No male love interest or father figure to come and rescue this girl!
3. Something to miss.
So there are my reasons for loving 'Croak'. If they sound good to you, give it a read. I'm sure it'll entertain you as much as it did me.
Final Score: 5/5
Unfortunately, like many of my rereads this year, I've spotted more than a few problems with it, that I somehow missed on my first read (was I doused in that black widow spider silk, Amnesia, too?).
The ableist R-word is said twice - this is a 2012 book, there is no excuse. Most of the characters are fun, hilarious and endearing, although they are petty, catty, jealous, childish, territorial and conservative people (the main, important characters who get the most page time are also white). Plus it feels like the author was trying too hard to make them like 'Buffy' archetypes, and the snarky humour isn't always placed in the most suitable and appropriate situations. I don't understand why Lex, the hardened and cynical loner protagonist, would fall in love with Croak and feel like she belongs there and gets along with everyone, when most of the time she is treated like a suspicious outsider, a freak, and eventually a criminal suspect.
There's the implication that murder is the absolute worst thing that a human can do - that makes them "real monsters" - and that rape and even child molestation belong in the same category of crimes as theft and fraud. A child abuse victim is vilified. 'Croak' is no stranger to un-self-aware girl-on-girl hate over a boy, feminine shaming, and slut shaming, either. Nor is it above perpetuating, unconsciously or not, stereotypical nuclear family dynamics (Lex's father is cool, calm, collected and reasonable, and her mother is fretful, overbearing, and bakes cookies. SERIOUSLY?)
Then there's the romance: I was not into it this time. It has nothing to do with how Lex and Driggs literally, physically hurt each other at the beginning - in fact, between these two OTT hotheads in a story and setting like this, with a tone like this, it actually comes across as legitimately funny - and their banter is witty and creative most of the time. It's just that their constant bickering and hostility towards one another can get too much after a while. Even boring and predictable. The biggest damage of all is when Driggs calls Lex an abomination and a freak (page 201), and had clearly thought that of her (and thought her to be dangerous and untrustworthy) throughout the rest of the book; this explosive deliverance comes right before the two think about making out for the first time, and Driggs never apologises to Lex, as far as I remember. Also, it is revealed at the very end that he is a creepy stalker, and always had been. Effing wonderful. I seriously don't buy that they are true, loving soulmates.
I hate Ferbus. He's a pillock. A gigantic prick. A useless, hypocritical wannabe Ron Weasley, with nary the same charm, humour, and courage. And I'm quite disappointed that he will never in this series come out of that closet he is so obviously in, where he suffocates in Narnia.
Some padding and meandering from the murder mystery plot is present throughout the middle and near the end, as well.
I just don't think I want to revisit this world and series - not when I would have to deal with the childish, pathetic rakes and Creatures of the Black Lagoon that are Norwood and Heloise (who really despise kids, specifically Junior Grims, for no explained reason). And knowing how this mess will end.
Sorry, I guess I'm giving up. But I'm glad to have experienced 'Croak' all the same. It's a novelty: a YA series starring a female protagonist with a dark side, who's a real antiheroine, and where there's no love triangle (unless you count the Lex-Driggs-Sofi triangle, which is so minor, extraneous and forgettable you wonder why it was included in the story in the first place); it definitely has that going for it.
Final Score: 3.5/5
P.S: How did I ever miss that the girl on the cover looks nothing like how Lex is described in the book? Personally, I prefer the unique and cool semblance of cover girl.
P.P.S: On page 199, Driggs says that Lex is an adult and so her parents should let her do whatever she wants, and let her live wherever she wants. Um, she's sixteen. Not an adult. Even by the standards of Croak and the Grims, she and all the other Juniors are kids. I know Driggs has lived in Croak for years and is fairly ignorant of how the outside world works, but this is never pointed out. So I'm left stunned and confused by that statement he makes.
P.P.P.S: AAAAAAAAAAAAAND the book contains the classic 'released/let out a breath I/she didn't know I/she was holding' line. That takes a large amount of marks off it instantly.
Original Review:
Premise: Teenage girl Grim Reaper.
Stop right there. You've already won me over.
'Croak' is a story about sixteen-year-old Lexington Bartleby, who after beating up more of her fellow school students (not shown, but the book cuts to the chase) is forced to move away for the summer to her uncle's farm, to learn to appreciate life and hard work.
Uncle Mort actually lives in a strange town called Croak, which Lex learns is home to higher-up and trainee soul reapers, or "Killers". Uncle Mort wants Lex to continue the family business, for he trusts in her capabilities.
As it turns out, she is a natural born Killer, and quite powerful. Is this a reason for her anger issues in the past two years? (She used to be very well-behaved.) Just how powerful is she? And Lex is not an ideal role model - she's practically a delinquent - so how far will she go with her powers, by her own choice?
I will list all the things that 'Croak' by Gina Damico is. It is:
1. One of the funniest and most fun books I've ever read, YA or otherwise. Seriously, the dialogue is a hoot!
2. Clever and creative. One road in the spooky town is called 'Dead End' among other humourous names for its streets and local hangouts. The afterlife depicted is both awe-inspiring and funny as... heaven.
3. Simply written and fast paced. The style is slick and punchy, if such words can be used to describe prose.
4. Great for 'Harry Potter' fans or for anyone who wants to move on from it.
5. Home to funny and complex characters. Lex is cartoonishly aggressive. But she is snarky and very witty, and gets called out on her behaviour, unlike another heroine in a YA book I won't name (*cough*EyesLikeStars*cough*). She is aware of her own flaws, and despite her violent tendencies she really is like a normal teenage girl, and she can kick butt all the way to Kingdom come. Driggs, her roommate living with Uncle Mort as his "pool guy", is probably the only boy I know, in both fiction and real life, who likes the film 'Titanic'. He's overconfident, but he's as full of snark, flaws and of a short temper as Lex, and they get along splendidly together. Their relationship is given time to develop before it becomes something more than teasing and petty squabbling and them being one another's emotional and physical punching bags. Other characters like Uncle Mort, Zara and Elysia are also interesting and likeable. They all serve a purpose to the story - which is both a mystery and a coming-of-age journey for Lex.
6. A mixture of black comedy and just plain dark storytelling. Really, the descriptions of the dead bodies that Lex encounters in her "Killing" errands are gruesome. There is horror here, as well as moral issues presented: such as letting a murderer go free to kill others, as the reapers' only job is to collect souls to send to the afterlife in a bank vault (just roll with it) in the Croak town. This YA novel has a backbone, as well as fully-realised and inventive world building.
7. Something that can be imagined as an anime while reading, especially during the over-the-top violent and/or hilarious moments (in the first chapter, Lex's mother ties her to a chair with rope just so she would have no choice but to sit down and listen to her parents - classic).
8. A first in a series, so there are as many unanswered questions as there are answered ones, and there are - big shock - secretive adults. While some mysteries are obvious, 'Croak' is still a gripping read, as it keeps you wondering HOW Lex and her friends are going to get to the bottom of a plot involving mysterious deaths occurring unnaturally around the world.
9. Above all it's, surprisingly, very touching and sad. The climax is bold, and leaves me wanting more. Things get more intense and dramatic - Lex will have to make genuinely hard decisions that affect not only herself, but the people she has learned to appreciate and love.
10. And it's everything I didn't get from Rachel Vincent's 'My Soul To Take' - for reasons listed above.
What 'Croak' is NOT:
1. A YA novel that uses a love triangle to try to create conflict and drama (no love triangle exists here - yey!).
2. A YA novel with a weak and dumb damsel-in-distress heroine. Lex can take care of herself and does have common sense. And slight spoiler: when she is held captive at the end of the book, she saves herself; with no external help from others. No male love interest or father figure to come and rescue this girl!
3. Something to miss.
So there are my reasons for loving 'Croak'. If they sound good to you, give it a read. I'm sure it'll entertain you as much as it did me.
Final Score: 5/5
Book Review - 'Dracula' by Bram Stoker
2021 EDIT: Alas, on my reread of this classic, I find the over-descriptions of everything to be wearisome (though it is not as bad as in 'Frankenstein,' in my opinion, which I never could finish); as is the expected sexism and racism of its era. Mina could be considered a progressive female character for her time, especially for a book of this genre, but just barely ("a man's brain", my arse; how insulting).
'Dracula' remains a horror classic for a reason, however. Therein contains chilling moments, and it is the biggest influencer of vampire lore known to humankind. Wolves, dogs, bats, rats, moths, dust, shapeshifters, flies, spiders, other dead animals, and vampires repellent to sunlight, garlic, crucifixes, non-invites, and crossing running water - it is all here. Jonathan Harker, Mina, Dr Van Helsing, Lucy Westenra, Renfield, the three vampire brides, and of course, the Count himself, are really the only characters worth remembering in the whole 400-page novel.
There are strong gay vibes throughout, as well, no matter how much Bram Stoker may dismiss the claim.
Oh how I love vampires.
Final Score: 3/5
Original Review:
After hundreds of adaptations and various cultural influences - from movies, television, books, parodies, songs to breakfast cereals - let us see the original 1897 novel that properly started the vampire lore and craze. While I am aware that 'Dracula' is not the first book or first anything to feature vampires (or similar demonic personifications of human fears), Bram Stoker's popular work has the biggest impact on the cultural phenomenon, and it helped shape vampire myths (the old movies, such as 'Nosferatu', mostly achieved that, though).
I have become increasingly interested in vampires over the years, despite never really finding them scary (and I am a huge scaredy-cat when it comes to horror stories). Maybe that's due to growing up in the 90's when they were all becoming more sympathetic and less monstrous (i.e. 'Buffy', 'Interview with the Vampire' etc). But since I'm planning to write a vampire novel series of my own someday, it's only required reading that I check out 'Dracula'.
Let us give rise to the "first" and world's most popular creature of the night, 'Dracula'.
I had the book on my shelf for a while last year, and it was only coincidence that I decided to read it just before Halloween. I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. I mean, I didn't find it to be VERY scary (though the creepy atmosphere is there), and it hardly features Dracula himself - he's absent through most of the middle of the novel. But with the narrative technique of people writing in diaries, letters, and newspaper articles, he remains a creepy enigma - the titular Count is a creature of mystery throughout the story: the less we know, the more we fear, much like in reality.
'Dracula' was written in the time of scientific discoveries - the supernatural being logically explained, but others things still not yet explained. It also explores basic human fears - of violent urges, madness and sexuality not repressed. 'Dracula' is about the fear of the demons in humanity as well as the fear of the demons in hell.
Each character, known through letters and diaries, is distinct and memorable. Although one in particular I feel I have to make note of is Mina Murray, or Mina Harker as she will later be called once married. It uplifted me to know that she isn't the weak and pathetic damsel-in-distress like she is portrayed in so many film adaptations. She's smart, brave when need be, and she felt real - even when she is a victim, she still refuses to give up. She's not an object of men's sexual fantasies nor a product of wispy feminine innocence - after all, that's Lucy Westenra's role - but a competent and likeable person. However I was wary when Van Helsing calls Mina, "a woman with a man's brain", or something along the lines of that. It sounds like he's saying that an intelligent woman is not a woman at all. It's a bit like saying that a woman who isn't also a mother isn't a proper woman. But I'll overlook that, since 'Dracula' was still written in 1897.
Speaking of Van Helsing, I want to add that after reading this book I find it a bit false that in adaptions he is portrayed as the ultimate vampire hunter. Because in the book, although he is a well-educated and strong leader, he is still an older, worn human physically, and - slight spoiler warning here - he doesn't end up killing Dracula. Though he kills other, lesser vamps...
'Dracula' also teaches us an important lesson - never leave a woman in the dark, both literally and figuratively. It'll lead to more trouble if she is left ignorant of goings-on. She can surprise you in her bravery and usefulness.
'Dracula' - while it didn't frighten me, it still entertained me. I'll definitely be reading more vampire books now to see how the myths and legends started by this book are taken and twisted into something new and inspiring.
How have violent and sexual attitudes changed over time? And how is popular culture reflecting them, and why? Read a vampire story and find out.
Final Score: 4/5
'Dracula' remains a horror classic for a reason, however. Therein contains chilling moments, and it is the biggest influencer of vampire lore known to humankind. Wolves, dogs, bats, rats, moths, dust, shapeshifters, flies, spiders, other dead animals, and vampires repellent to sunlight, garlic, crucifixes, non-invites, and crossing running water - it is all here. Jonathan Harker, Mina, Dr Van Helsing, Lucy Westenra, Renfield, the three vampire brides, and of course, the Count himself, are really the only characters worth remembering in the whole 400-page novel.
There are strong gay vibes throughout, as well, no matter how much Bram Stoker may dismiss the claim.
Oh how I love vampires.
Final Score: 3/5
Original Review:
After hundreds of adaptations and various cultural influences - from movies, television, books, parodies, songs to breakfast cereals - let us see the original 1897 novel that properly started the vampire lore and craze. While I am aware that 'Dracula' is not the first book or first anything to feature vampires (or similar demonic personifications of human fears), Bram Stoker's popular work has the biggest impact on the cultural phenomenon, and it helped shape vampire myths (the old movies, such as 'Nosferatu', mostly achieved that, though).
I have become increasingly interested in vampires over the years, despite never really finding them scary (and I am a huge scaredy-cat when it comes to horror stories). Maybe that's due to growing up in the 90's when they were all becoming more sympathetic and less monstrous (i.e. 'Buffy', 'Interview with the Vampire' etc). But since I'm planning to write a vampire novel series of my own someday, it's only required reading that I check out 'Dracula'.
Let us give rise to the "first" and world's most popular creature of the night, 'Dracula'.
I had the book on my shelf for a while last year, and it was only coincidence that I decided to read it just before Halloween. I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. I mean, I didn't find it to be VERY scary (though the creepy atmosphere is there), and it hardly features Dracula himself - he's absent through most of the middle of the novel. But with the narrative technique of people writing in diaries, letters, and newspaper articles, he remains a creepy enigma - the titular Count is a creature of mystery throughout the story: the less we know, the more we fear, much like in reality.
'Dracula' was written in the time of scientific discoveries - the supernatural being logically explained, but others things still not yet explained. It also explores basic human fears - of violent urges, madness and sexuality not repressed. 'Dracula' is about the fear of the demons in humanity as well as the fear of the demons in hell.
Each character, known through letters and diaries, is distinct and memorable. Although one in particular I feel I have to make note of is Mina Murray, or Mina Harker as she will later be called once married. It uplifted me to know that she isn't the weak and pathetic damsel-in-distress like she is portrayed in so many film adaptations. She's smart, brave when need be, and she felt real - even when she is a victim, she still refuses to give up. She's not an object of men's sexual fantasies nor a product of wispy feminine innocence - after all, that's Lucy Westenra's role - but a competent and likeable person. However I was wary when Van Helsing calls Mina, "a woman with a man's brain", or something along the lines of that. It sounds like he's saying that an intelligent woman is not a woman at all. It's a bit like saying that a woman who isn't also a mother isn't a proper woman. But I'll overlook that, since 'Dracula' was still written in 1897.
Speaking of Van Helsing, I want to add that after reading this book I find it a bit false that in adaptions he is portrayed as the ultimate vampire hunter. Because in the book, although he is a well-educated and strong leader, he is still an older, worn human physically, and - slight spoiler warning here - he doesn't end up killing Dracula. Though he kills other, lesser vamps...
'Dracula' also teaches us an important lesson - never leave a woman in the dark, both literally and figuratively. It'll lead to more trouble if she is left ignorant of goings-on. She can surprise you in her bravery and usefulness.
'Dracula' - while it didn't frighten me, it still entertained me. I'll definitely be reading more vampire books now to see how the myths and legends started by this book are taken and twisted into something new and inspiring.
How have violent and sexual attitudes changed over time? And how is popular culture reflecting them, and why? Read a vampire story and find out.
Final Score: 4/5
Book Review - 'Wonder' by R.J. Palacio
2021 EDIT: I wasn't feeling as much from 'Wonder' as last time. Not positive feelings, anyway.
Great, important lessons are taught, for everyone to learn, but a lot of the book comes across as a little tone-deaf and meanspirited, in my opinion. Like, Auggie and the word "normal" are never associated with each other, ever. Everyone else is described as being normal-looking in comparison to him. But what is normal? I got mixed messages whenever Auggie is described; nearly all the multiple POV sections will go out of their way to mention how shocking, abnormal, weird, scary, and freakish he looks. He's not just different - everybody, even the nice characters and his own family, will bang on and on about his facial deformity like it's the scariest and most inhuman thing in the world to look at. That it's because of his face that he will never be normal, so why bother treating him like everyone else (this sentiment comes directly from his own sister, btw)? Auggie's "scary" face, his "abnormality", his "unlucky" genetics; it all has to be acknowledged as "bad", as "wrong", at any opportunity. It's terrible, and it's almost never called out on. Doesn't this go against the acceptance and kindness message of the book? But then on the same paragraph a contradiction like the following pops up suddenly: 'Here's what I think: the only reason I'm not ordinary is that no one else sees me that way.', and, 'I think the only person in the world who realizes how ordinary I am is me.' (both quotes are from the first page.)
Auggie's family obviously loves him very much, but they seem to treat him more like a burden and a nuisance than a person, especially his sister Via. His life is made harder than others, and it is not his fault. It's society's. But his very existence is repeatedly treated like an unpleasantness, at best. He's a blot; he's what's preventing most characters' lives from being happy, because of the way he looks. School bullies like Julian are bad - most kids can be very mean, and they know it - but grown-arse adults like Julian's mother are even worse. No long-term comeuppance for those two evil people.
Auggie is just a kid, and I don't think any of the other characters fully grasp that fact at the end.
The ending is rather patronising and unrealistic, too. I hated being reminded of how much of a hellhole school was while I was reading 'Wonder' as a quarantined adult, but then for it to contrive that ending, which I know would never happen, least of all to targets/ victims like Auggie and severe outcasts/invisibles/targets like myself...I felt it wasn't a particularly good or honest representation of life at all. Schools - freaking teachers - are never that kind, thoughtful and understanding! Children's story or no, happy, perfect endings don't exist like that anywhere.
Plus, that philosophy quote about always choosing to be kind over being right, as if those two criterion are mutually exclusive. Like, to be kind to people is often the right thing to do. It's basic human decency. The quote is like that whole "Facts don't care about your feelings" bullshit all over again. Kind people do care about facts and the truth - it's what makes them sympathetic, empathetic, openminded and understanding. I don't agree with the quote's core concept - the supposed theme of 'Wonder' - is what I'm trying to explain.
Although 'Wonder' isn't perfect, it does contain enough human truths and lessons in altruism that I won't discourage anyone from reading it. I know it is an important book to many, many people, and it's easy to see why. It might be depressing for some, a mixed mess for others, but it is uplifting and affirming for others more.
Read it and make up your own mind.
Final Score: 3/5
Original Review:
"Your deeds are your monuments" - one of Mr Browne's precepts.
I wanted to get my hands on 'Wonder' because of all the praise. I thought it would be like 'My Sister Lives on the Mantelpiece', a book I love very much.
'Wonder' is a quick read guaranteed to give you so many mixed emotions that catharsis would be a necessity. Though it's not as satisfactory as 'My Sister Lives on the Mantelpiece'.
When reading 'Wonder', at first I thought it would be told entirely from the POV of the protag, August Pullman, and how he lives a life of someone born with a face no stranger would accept as being normal. I already grasped the hopeful and sweet yet realistic feel from the characters and their relationships with Auggie, but I was worried the middle school story would get boring and predictable quickly.
Then it changed POVs. We get to hear the story of August from the perspective of his older sister Via, his school friends Summer and Jack, Via's boyfriend Justin and estranged friend Miranda, and lastly back to August himself, and how going to school has changed his life for the better and not for the worst. We get to know how other people feel about his face, and they react to it in different ways - ways in which any person would; but more specifically young people just getting to know the world.
Kids are mean, we all know that. And school is a breeding ground for bullies. They hate and ridicule anything that is outside the realm of "normal". They are afraid of change and difference. So it is hard not to feel sorry for August when, at the age of ten, he starts school; like any other kid. He is like any other kid - he loves 'Star Wars' and his pet dog Daisy, and he thinks and talks like a normal, happy boy. However other kids - and adults, for that matter - won't likely see him as such: they will only see his deformed face. They will avoid him, whisper about him when he is near, call him a freak (among other horrible names), and have panic attacks or flee at the prospect of having skin contact with him.
But while there are nasty people in 'Wonder', there is hope in the form of lovely and understanding kids and adults as well. August's parents are perhaps the best I've ever read in fiction - they love Auggie for who he is on the inside, and do everything they can to make him happy. However their weakness is overprotecting him: they went back and forth on sending him to school in the first place, though it was mainly for medical reasons that they kept him from attending. Auggie has had many operations on his face, though it still scares people. Though they treat him like a little kid out of fear for his self-esteem, I think August is lucky to have parents like Isabel and Nate - they care for their son, as he is a good sport.
Via, as she grows older, starts to see how others see her brother. She feels terrible about it, because she too had always been protective of him when others stare or whisper about him in public. She finds she can't understand him anymore like she used to, due to school popularity pressures. As a teenager, she feels lonely that her parents pay more attention to Auggie than her, and she may begin to resent him for it. Via's childhood friends are changing and distancing themselves from her, and she can confide in no one but the memory of her deceased grandmother. Her character is very real and three-dimensional.
Other kids at August's school also have different reactions to the new kid with the deformed face. Many are, again, realistic yet hopeful - hopeful that, thanks to August and his general sense of fun, they will grow up to be tolerant and openminded people. Unlike some of the adults in this book who didn't learn from childhood that you should not judge others by their appearances alone.
'Wonder''s chapters are very short, episodic like a children's soap opera, and punchy. Each beats with emotional and relatable events, especially ones set in the middle and secondary schools. Indeed, anyone who has been to school will feel what August or the other POV characters are feeling in their lives amongst the horrible people of any age.
'Wonder' is not perfect, however. Some events happen too conveniently; most of all near the end. Maybe I'm a little cynical, but the book is somewhat too hopeful and uplifting, especially with its subject matter. The characters may be realistic (mostly) but the events feel a little planned out, so it can reach a happy conclusion. Really, why couldn't my middle school have been as nice and encouraging as August's!
And I'm still not quite sure if 'Wonder' is a children's book or YA or both.
Another convenience that irks me a bit is the school bully's mother just happens to be a member of the school committee board, so of course the bully can get away with murder, as long as mummy says that everything wrong is the bullied kid's fault.
But aside from little imperfections, 'Wonder' is a profound treat, with likeable and relatable characters, an important message, and other cute touches. It is a sweet book that can be both sad and uplifting, and even funny in a lot of places. It teaches us about different sides to human nature.
Remember, it is what you do for yourself and for others that defines you as a person. What you look like does not matter.
'Wonder' knows about childhood and unfairness, and it looks on hopefully at the future.
Final Score: 4/5
Great, important lessons are taught, for everyone to learn, but a lot of the book comes across as a little tone-deaf and meanspirited, in my opinion. Like, Auggie and the word "normal" are never associated with each other, ever. Everyone else is described as being normal-looking in comparison to him. But what is normal? I got mixed messages whenever Auggie is described; nearly all the multiple POV sections will go out of their way to mention how shocking, abnormal, weird, scary, and freakish he looks. He's not just different - everybody, even the nice characters and his own family, will bang on and on about his facial deformity like it's the scariest and most inhuman thing in the world to look at. That it's because of his face that he will never be normal, so why bother treating him like everyone else (this sentiment comes directly from his own sister, btw)? Auggie's "scary" face, his "abnormality", his "unlucky" genetics; it all has to be acknowledged as "bad", as "wrong", at any opportunity. It's terrible, and it's almost never called out on. Doesn't this go against the acceptance and kindness message of the book? But then on the same paragraph a contradiction like the following pops up suddenly: 'Here's what I think: the only reason I'm not ordinary is that no one else sees me that way.', and, 'I think the only person in the world who realizes how ordinary I am is me.' (both quotes are from the first page.)
Auggie's family obviously loves him very much, but they seem to treat him more like a burden and a nuisance than a person, especially his sister Via. His life is made harder than others, and it is not his fault. It's society's. But his very existence is repeatedly treated like an unpleasantness, at best. He's a blot; he's what's preventing most characters' lives from being happy, because of the way he looks. School bullies like Julian are bad - most kids can be very mean, and they know it - but grown-arse adults like Julian's mother are even worse. No long-term comeuppance for those two evil people.
Auggie is just a kid, and I don't think any of the other characters fully grasp that fact at the end.
The ending is rather patronising and unrealistic, too. I hated being reminded of how much of a hellhole school was while I was reading 'Wonder' as a quarantined adult, but then for it to contrive that ending, which I know would never happen, least of all to targets/ victims like Auggie and severe outcasts/invisibles/targets like myself...I felt it wasn't a particularly good or honest representation of life at all. Schools - freaking teachers - are never that kind, thoughtful and understanding! Children's story or no, happy, perfect endings don't exist like that anywhere.
Plus, that philosophy quote about always choosing to be kind over being right, as if those two criterion are mutually exclusive. Like, to be kind to people is often the right thing to do. It's basic human decency. The quote is like that whole "Facts don't care about your feelings" bullshit all over again. Kind people do care about facts and the truth - it's what makes them sympathetic, empathetic, openminded and understanding. I don't agree with the quote's core concept - the supposed theme of 'Wonder' - is what I'm trying to explain.
Although 'Wonder' isn't perfect, it does contain enough human truths and lessons in altruism that I won't discourage anyone from reading it. I know it is an important book to many, many people, and it's easy to see why. It might be depressing for some, a mixed mess for others, but it is uplifting and affirming for others more.
Read it and make up your own mind.
Final Score: 3/5
Original Review:
"Your deeds are your monuments" - one of Mr Browne's precepts.
I wanted to get my hands on 'Wonder' because of all the praise. I thought it would be like 'My Sister Lives on the Mantelpiece', a book I love very much.
'Wonder' is a quick read guaranteed to give you so many mixed emotions that catharsis would be a necessity. Though it's not as satisfactory as 'My Sister Lives on the Mantelpiece'.
When reading 'Wonder', at first I thought it would be told entirely from the POV of the protag, August Pullman, and how he lives a life of someone born with a face no stranger would accept as being normal. I already grasped the hopeful and sweet yet realistic feel from the characters and their relationships with Auggie, but I was worried the middle school story would get boring and predictable quickly.
Then it changed POVs. We get to hear the story of August from the perspective of his older sister Via, his school friends Summer and Jack, Via's boyfriend Justin and estranged friend Miranda, and lastly back to August himself, and how going to school has changed his life for the better and not for the worst. We get to know how other people feel about his face, and they react to it in different ways - ways in which any person would; but more specifically young people just getting to know the world.
Kids are mean, we all know that. And school is a breeding ground for bullies. They hate and ridicule anything that is outside the realm of "normal". They are afraid of change and difference. So it is hard not to feel sorry for August when, at the age of ten, he starts school; like any other kid. He is like any other kid - he loves 'Star Wars' and his pet dog Daisy, and he thinks and talks like a normal, happy boy. However other kids - and adults, for that matter - won't likely see him as such: they will only see his deformed face. They will avoid him, whisper about him when he is near, call him a freak (among other horrible names), and have panic attacks or flee at the prospect of having skin contact with him.
But while there are nasty people in 'Wonder', there is hope in the form of lovely and understanding kids and adults as well. August's parents are perhaps the best I've ever read in fiction - they love Auggie for who he is on the inside, and do everything they can to make him happy. However their weakness is overprotecting him: they went back and forth on sending him to school in the first place, though it was mainly for medical reasons that they kept him from attending. Auggie has had many operations on his face, though it still scares people. Though they treat him like a little kid out of fear for his self-esteem, I think August is lucky to have parents like Isabel and Nate - they care for their son, as he is a good sport.
Via, as she grows older, starts to see how others see her brother. She feels terrible about it, because she too had always been protective of him when others stare or whisper about him in public. She finds she can't understand him anymore like she used to, due to school popularity pressures. As a teenager, she feels lonely that her parents pay more attention to Auggie than her, and she may begin to resent him for it. Via's childhood friends are changing and distancing themselves from her, and she can confide in no one but the memory of her deceased grandmother. Her character is very real and three-dimensional.
Other kids at August's school also have different reactions to the new kid with the deformed face. Many are, again, realistic yet hopeful - hopeful that, thanks to August and his general sense of fun, they will grow up to be tolerant and openminded people. Unlike some of the adults in this book who didn't learn from childhood that you should not judge others by their appearances alone.
'Wonder''s chapters are very short, episodic like a children's soap opera, and punchy. Each beats with emotional and relatable events, especially ones set in the middle and secondary schools. Indeed, anyone who has been to school will feel what August or the other POV characters are feeling in their lives amongst the horrible people of any age.
'Wonder' is not perfect, however. Some events happen too conveniently; most of all near the end. Maybe I'm a little cynical, but the book is somewhat too hopeful and uplifting, especially with its subject matter. The characters may be realistic (mostly) but the events feel a little planned out, so it can reach a happy conclusion. Really, why couldn't my middle school have been as nice and encouraging as August's!
And I'm still not quite sure if 'Wonder' is a children's book or YA or both.
Another convenience that irks me a bit is the school bully's mother just happens to be a member of the school committee board, so of course the bully can get away with murder, as long as mummy says that everything wrong is the bullied kid's fault.
But aside from little imperfections, 'Wonder' is a profound treat, with likeable and relatable characters, an important message, and other cute touches. It is a sweet book that can be both sad and uplifting, and even funny in a lot of places. It teaches us about different sides to human nature.
Remember, it is what you do for yourself and for others that defines you as a person. What you look like does not matter.
'Wonder' knows about childhood and unfairness, and it looks on hopefully at the future.
Final Score: 4/5
Book Review - 'Skulduggery Pleasant' by Derek Landy
2022 EDIT: Boy have I come a long way. I read the first nine books of the 'Skulduggery Pleasant' series six years ago, and for some reason it is still going. All I'll say is that this is an incredibly dark, violent and gory series that's ostensibly for children, and I hated how it ended. Hated hated hated what was done to Valkyrie and Tanith, hated what was done with most of the characters, and I hated that most of them just. won't. die. when. they. should. For books that get more violent with each instalment, the author either avoids death entirely or shrugs it off as barely a big deal.
However, I still like the first book, though its sequels have soured it enough for me that I won't be keeping it, as part of my clearing my bookshelves.
Thus are my final thoughts on 'Skulduggery Pleasant'. They are books I no longer care for. The end.
Original Review:
I remember reading the first two books in the 'Skulduggery Pleasant' series at school. There were no more in the library since they hadn't been published yet, so I didn't continue. But my word did I enjoy 'Skulduggery Pleasant'; the first book especially entertained me.
It's a cauldron potion mixture of 'Doctor Who', 'Sherlock Holmes', 'Supernatural', and 'The Avengers' - and it's freaking awesome.
It's also good to see a modern children's fantasy book that cannot easily be compared to 'Harry Potter'.
'Skulduggery Pleasant' follows the story of twelve-year-old Stephanie Edgley, whose novelist uncle dies and she discovers his involvement in another world that's full of dark magic, sorcerers and monsters. She is saved from a supernatural attack by a living skeleton called Skulduggery Pleasant, who can shoot fireballs from his hands. Like any child who discovers that her world is not what it had always seemed, she wants to know more about it. And coming from a relatively boring and greedy family where only her uncle had inspired her, she wants to know more about him - and about how he truly died. Skulduggery eventually takes her under his wing, and both characters' spunk and back-and-forth dialogue exchanges make them an endearing detective duo. They have to retrieve the legendary Scepter of the Ancients and stop the return of the gods called the Faceless Ones, before any dark sorcerer does.
Action-packed, smart, fun, and, as is essential for a book aimed at a young demographic, is hugely readable and addictive, but with a plot that's not too straighforward. Filled with humorous twists (a Book of Names whose mode of defense is making people disinterested in it as they approach it? Genius) and kickass characters (I adore Tanith Low). It's a story where not everyone is who they first appear to be, and where the knowledge of names gives magicians the power to control and destroy.
Despite being called 'Skulduggery Pleasant', the book is told from the perspective of the relatable novice Stephanie, aka Valkyrie Cain (great cover name). She's funny, brave, flawed, and a cool outcast in her original dull world. She never gives up, never backs down, no matter how many times she should have been killed. Whether you think the author wrote a realistic twelve-year-old girl doesn't matter. She's as dynamic and memorable as the rest of the cast, regardless of her age.
I have set for myself the challenge of reading more 'Skulduggery Pleasant' books (at last!). It's easy to see why I enjoyed this when I was younger. It can get rather dark and violent for a title for children, but its brand of creativity and humour saves it from being too gritty.
Final Score: 4/5
However, I still like the first book, though its sequels have soured it enough for me that I won't be keeping it, as part of my clearing my bookshelves.
Thus are my final thoughts on 'Skulduggery Pleasant'. They are books I no longer care for. The end.
Original Review:
I remember reading the first two books in the 'Skulduggery Pleasant' series at school. There were no more in the library since they hadn't been published yet, so I didn't continue. But my word did I enjoy 'Skulduggery Pleasant'; the first book especially entertained me.
It's a cauldron potion mixture of 'Doctor Who', 'Sherlock Holmes', 'Supernatural', and 'The Avengers' - and it's freaking awesome.
It's also good to see a modern children's fantasy book that cannot easily be compared to 'Harry Potter'.
'Skulduggery Pleasant' follows the story of twelve-year-old Stephanie Edgley, whose novelist uncle dies and she discovers his involvement in another world that's full of dark magic, sorcerers and monsters. She is saved from a supernatural attack by a living skeleton called Skulduggery Pleasant, who can shoot fireballs from his hands. Like any child who discovers that her world is not what it had always seemed, she wants to know more about it. And coming from a relatively boring and greedy family where only her uncle had inspired her, she wants to know more about him - and about how he truly died. Skulduggery eventually takes her under his wing, and both characters' spunk and back-and-forth dialogue exchanges make them an endearing detective duo. They have to retrieve the legendary Scepter of the Ancients and stop the return of the gods called the Faceless Ones, before any dark sorcerer does.
Action-packed, smart, fun, and, as is essential for a book aimed at a young demographic, is hugely readable and addictive, but with a plot that's not too straighforward. Filled with humorous twists (a Book of Names whose mode of defense is making people disinterested in it as they approach it? Genius) and kickass characters (I adore Tanith Low). It's a story where not everyone is who they first appear to be, and where the knowledge of names gives magicians the power to control and destroy.
Despite being called 'Skulduggery Pleasant', the book is told from the perspective of the relatable novice Stephanie, aka Valkyrie Cain (great cover name). She's funny, brave, flawed, and a cool outcast in her original dull world. She never gives up, never backs down, no matter how many times she should have been killed. Whether you think the author wrote a realistic twelve-year-old girl doesn't matter. She's as dynamic and memorable as the rest of the cast, regardless of her age.
I have set for myself the challenge of reading more 'Skulduggery Pleasant' books (at last!). It's easy to see why I enjoyed this when I was younger. It can get rather dark and violent for a title for children, but its brand of creativity and humour saves it from being too gritty.
Final Score: 4/5
Thursday 26 September 2013
Non-Fiction Book Review - 'I Can't Believe It's an Unofficial Simpsons Guide' by Gareth Roberts and Gary Russell
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:
I've had this since I was little. My copy is worn now - with the back cover missing - but I still like to look through it now and then, enjoying every page.
'I Can't Believe It's an Unofficial Simpsons Guide' - Information on the episodes of the first eight seasons of one of the best television shows of all time, and a worldwide cultural phenomenon. I leaned a lot about 'The Simpsons' from reading this little book. Or at least it was the start of a deeper understanding of the show than what I saw on TV with a young cartoon-loving mind.
It's 'The Simpsons' touch - smart, funny and nostalgic.
Final Score: 4/5
Final Score: 3.5/5
Original Review:
I've had this since I was little. My copy is worn now - with the back cover missing - but I still like to look through it now and then, enjoying every page.
'I Can't Believe It's an Unofficial Simpsons Guide' - Information on the episodes of the first eight seasons of one of the best television shows of all time, and a worldwide cultural phenomenon. I leaned a lot about 'The Simpsons' from reading this little book. Or at least it was the start of a deeper understanding of the show than what I saw on TV with a young cartoon-loving mind.
It's 'The Simpsons' touch - smart, funny and nostalgic.
Final Score: 4/5
Non-Fiction Book Review - 'The Equality Illusion: The Truth About Women And Men Today ' by Kat Banyard
I will start this review by accounting my own thoughts on feminism, and I will try to be as certain and bold as Kat Banyard. Bare with me.
Years before reading 'The Equality Illusion' - the first book about feminism I've read - I had considered myself a feminist because, in my teens, I became observant of the differences in gender. I felt I had to think about these things, because I was increasingly aware that people's attitudes - on the TV and movies I watched - concerning women's roles were making me very uncomfortable. I became conscious of how boys at school treated me as well - linked to me being a girl, nothing more. I had platonic male friends, and I felt I was never being taken seriously amongst them. Also I felt in the minority because other girls always hung out with each other. And they had a boyfriend and spent huge amounts of money on their looks - the only things that apparently mattered in life. I was aware of being pressured to suit the "status quo", and I didn't like it.
But even before my teens, I had seriously thought about women's rights and roles in my society after watching terrible sitcom episodes (ones I could write whole dissertations about their flaws), and not seeing enough positive female role models in the media and in real life. Everything was all pink, cooking, boys, shopping, looking pretty, and having babies for those with no Y chromosome.
Now, I like pink, boys, shopping and babies (I'm a bad cook), but even back then I didn't want them to be my only life choices. I love the media and geeky things, and reading and writing about stuff.
It wasn't until much later that I began to see a potentially harmful social stigma attached to girls who are "different" and not "girly"...
Thanks to the internet, I had begun to think more critically about gender issues from feminist's articles. Movies, TV, cartoons, posters, advertisements and politics make it clear: men have to be dominant and active, while women have to be passive and caring. Why? Is the message sent unconsciously? Is it just the way things are? Thinking about those sitcom and other TV episodes, I refused to accept the "norm" and that it's "natural". Women are better than this - I knew this then because I'm female and I like thinking. I like pink and I still have a brain. And pink is a cool colour; people shouldn't associate it with girliness like it's a bad thing.
It wasn't until I read 'The Equality Illusion' that my eyes were fully opened. It horrified me, and I'm glad of it. It made me seriously think of how my life had been shaped subconsciously. Sexism isn't the exception, it's the rule - misogyny exists and it has always existed in one way or another. It is mainstream in a patriarchal world; it is all around us, not just on TV or movies or books. Women are discriminated against everyday in any situation, and usually it is for sexual reasons (can be based on looks alone). No one is immune to double standards. I refuse to say this is "natural". Rape, victim blaming, low pay, and the saying "boys will be boys" are damaging, and they affect serious human issues. They should not be viewed as normal. Kat Banyard has a point: something has to be done, before feminism disappears and we don't progress but regress.
'The Equality Illusion' contents include:
Part 1: Today
Mirror Mirror on the Wall - Waking Up to Body Image
Hands Up for... - A Gendered Education
Sexism and the City - Just Another Days Work
Tough Love - Coming Home to Violence
The Booty Myth - A Night Out in the Sex Industry
Bedroom Politics - Reproductive Rights and Wrongs
Part 2: Tomorrow
A New Day
Feminism is progression. It is a necessity to human rights. A cause that says that women/girls are neither inferior nor superior to men/boys - we are all equal.
Attitudes and jokes that hint at sexism/chauvinism/misogyny are not harmless or fun, they are in fact dangerous to our culture. We unconsciously absorb these messages in the medium every day; I did in my childhood. For example, that women should be passive, and if they're not they're either a whore or a bitch (or both, or more), and that's bad. They are no longer considered human. And yet when they don't fit the socially-accepted standard of "pretty", that's bad. They have to be objects and used by men. We still treat men and women differently and see nothing wrong with it.
So I believe there is an equality illusion. One of UK Feminista's founders Kat Banyard exposes it all in this well-researched and perspective-changing book. She doesn't just state facts; by the end she offers options on how to combat sexism in the cultural mainstream. It is not all hopeless, we don't have to accept sexist BS when it is apparent. Change is possible, and it can last.
Now that I have read 'The Equality Illusion' I can say with confidence that I am a feminist. Because I believe that progression in society is important. I only consider myself a decent and observant human being who cares about equality in the 21st century. We should not be divided or ranked "dominant" over others because of gender.
Don't belittle the rights that the people of my gender and men who care have fought for for so long. Two halves are equal. In this world, half the human race is female, each with her own individual mind, personality, friends and family - never forget that.
Final Score: 5/5
Praise for The Equality Illusion by Kat Banyard includes:
'Read it. Share it. Give it to your mum, your daughter, your son, your brother, your sister, your dad.' - Irish Times
'Reading this, I am wholly convinced: the sooner we take on this battle, the better.' - Independent Book of the Week
"Excellent and thought-provoking... I really feel everyone should read it... Thanks to Banyard I now know exactly how to respond to people who go "isn't feminism a bit dated?" or "sure what are you giving out about now?" I am in her debt." - Irish Times blogs
Years before reading 'The Equality Illusion' - the first book about feminism I've read - I had considered myself a feminist because, in my teens, I became observant of the differences in gender. I felt I had to think about these things, because I was increasingly aware that people's attitudes - on the TV and movies I watched - concerning women's roles were making me very uncomfortable. I became conscious of how boys at school treated me as well - linked to me being a girl, nothing more. I had platonic male friends, and I felt I was never being taken seriously amongst them. Also I felt in the minority because other girls always hung out with each other. And they had a boyfriend and spent huge amounts of money on their looks - the only things that apparently mattered in life. I was aware of being pressured to suit the "status quo", and I didn't like it.
But even before my teens, I had seriously thought about women's rights and roles in my society after watching terrible sitcom episodes (ones I could write whole dissertations about their flaws), and not seeing enough positive female role models in the media and in real life. Everything was all pink, cooking, boys, shopping, looking pretty, and having babies for those with no Y chromosome.
Now, I like pink, boys, shopping and babies (I'm a bad cook), but even back then I didn't want them to be my only life choices. I love the media and geeky things, and reading and writing about stuff.
It wasn't until much later that I began to see a potentially harmful social stigma attached to girls who are "different" and not "girly"...
Thanks to the internet, I had begun to think more critically about gender issues from feminist's articles. Movies, TV, cartoons, posters, advertisements and politics make it clear: men have to be dominant and active, while women have to be passive and caring. Why? Is the message sent unconsciously? Is it just the way things are? Thinking about those sitcom and other TV episodes, I refused to accept the "norm" and that it's "natural". Women are better than this - I knew this then because I'm female and I like thinking. I like pink and I still have a brain. And pink is a cool colour; people shouldn't associate it with girliness like it's a bad thing.
It wasn't until I read 'The Equality Illusion' that my eyes were fully opened. It horrified me, and I'm glad of it. It made me seriously think of how my life had been shaped subconsciously. Sexism isn't the exception, it's the rule - misogyny exists and it has always existed in one way or another. It is mainstream in a patriarchal world; it is all around us, not just on TV or movies or books. Women are discriminated against everyday in any situation, and usually it is for sexual reasons (can be based on looks alone). No one is immune to double standards. I refuse to say this is "natural". Rape, victim blaming, low pay, and the saying "boys will be boys" are damaging, and they affect serious human issues. They should not be viewed as normal. Kat Banyard has a point: something has to be done, before feminism disappears and we don't progress but regress.
'The Equality Illusion' contents include:
Part 1: Today
Mirror Mirror on the Wall - Waking Up to Body Image
Hands Up for... - A Gendered Education
Sexism and the City - Just Another Days Work
Tough Love - Coming Home to Violence
The Booty Myth - A Night Out in the Sex Industry
Bedroom Politics - Reproductive Rights and Wrongs
Part 2: Tomorrow
A New Day
Feminism is progression. It is a necessity to human rights. A cause that says that women/girls are neither inferior nor superior to men/boys - we are all equal.
Attitudes and jokes that hint at sexism/chauvinism/misogyny are not harmless or fun, they are in fact dangerous to our culture. We unconsciously absorb these messages in the medium every day; I did in my childhood. For example, that women should be passive, and if they're not they're either a whore or a bitch (or both, or more), and that's bad. They are no longer considered human. And yet when they don't fit the socially-accepted standard of "pretty", that's bad. They have to be objects and used by men. We still treat men and women differently and see nothing wrong with it.
So I believe there is an equality illusion. One of UK Feminista's founders Kat Banyard exposes it all in this well-researched and perspective-changing book. She doesn't just state facts; by the end she offers options on how to combat sexism in the cultural mainstream. It is not all hopeless, we don't have to accept sexist BS when it is apparent. Change is possible, and it can last.
Now that I have read 'The Equality Illusion' I can say with confidence that I am a feminist. Because I believe that progression in society is important. I only consider myself a decent and observant human being who cares about equality in the 21st century. We should not be divided or ranked "dominant" over others because of gender.
Don't belittle the rights that the people of my gender and men who care have fought for for so long. Two halves are equal. In this world, half the human race is female, each with her own individual mind, personality, friends and family - never forget that.
Final Score: 5/5
Praise for The Equality Illusion by Kat Banyard includes:
'Read it. Share it. Give it to your mum, your daughter, your son, your brother, your sister, your dad.' - Irish Times
'Reading this, I am wholly convinced: the sooner we take on this battle, the better.' - Independent Book of the Week
"Excellent and thought-provoking... I really feel everyone should read it... Thanks to Banyard I now know exactly how to respond to people who go "isn't feminism a bit dated?" or "sure what are you giving out about now?" I am in her debt." - Irish Times blogs
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)