Reading Wish List

Paradise Lost by John Milton
Inferno by Dante Alighieri
The Fault in Our Stars by John Green
The Road by Cormac McCarthy
Angelfall by Susan Ee
Thus Spoke Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche
Notes From Underground by Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Crime and Punishment  by Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Dead Souls by Nikolai Gogol
Leviathan by Scott Westerfeld

Blog 4: Hero reflection

 It seemed like every time I saw a book talk, President Snow was elected best villain. After that fact was hammered into my head, I decided that I would succumb to the group and read The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins. I had never taken interest with the novels, however I have watched the first two movies. Overall, I was a little disappointed with the novel, because it didn't simply live up to all the hype. However something, or someone, that stands out to me it the main protagonist: Katniss Everdeen.

Katniss Everdeen is the definition of an anti-hero. She comes from an extremely poor district, sacrifices herself to save her sister, and struggles throughout the whole story with the idea of killing other tributes. All of these put together, and it's not hard to that Katniss isn't perfect. However, she tries to overcome these odds, and eventually does.

Suzanne Collins was smart with the attributes of Katniss Everdeen. Here you have a girl, whose family is shattered, lives in poverty and must face an oppressive government. All of these combined makes for an extremely relatable character for the youth of America. Among all of us, there are usually family issues, to which Collins takes advantage of and establishes your connection early on. The oppressive government and living in poverty connects with the teenage feeling of always being trapped, or never being able to get ahead. With the construction of Katniss Everdeen as protagonist, the novel becomes a revered classic among teenagers and young adults.

Katniss is able to display bravado despite her personal flaws throughout all of the story. A primary example is actually found within the very beginning of the novel: The Reaping. The Reaping is portrayed as this scheduled event of dread, and is always on the front of everyone's mind. When Prim is called, she shows so much courage by raising her voice and taking her place. I don't believe she even hesitated. Of all the things that Katniss is, a coward she is not.
Another example of personal struggle throughout the novel is her struggle with the idea of taking others’ lives. This is especially true when it comes to Peeta. Katniss, in the beginning, she doesn't know whether to trust Peeta, for she has to kill him. However, Peeta did stop Katniss and her family from starving. So she is stuck in this internal battle of "Do I trust the man who saved my family and me, or will he just kill me as soon as I get in the arena?”

There is also a sense of humbleness and self-deprecation with Katniss. While Haymitch was interviewing her about any certain skills that she has that may help her odds within the game, she denies any particular skill. If Katniss saw more in herself, she might have flaunted her skills with a bow, and her particular hunting skills. This dialogue is very important, because not only does it show Katniss' humbleness, but it also shows that Peeta is willing to stick up for Katniss. He interjects with "She's excellent" (Collins 98), correcting Katniss when she says she simply does well with a bow.

Katniss Everdeen is the textbook definition of an anti-hero, but she is a very well-constructed anti-hero. Collins is able to create a character that connects so well with today's youth that other areas can avoid scrutiny due simply to the fact that the reader wants to continue her journey. I believe that if Katniss wasn’t as well developed as she was, I would have given The Hunger Games a much lower personal score. After all, the main protagonist is the most important part of a story.

Book 2 Trailer link

Book 2 Trailer: No Country for Old Men

Book Talk

5 Reasons why Ray Bradbury is crazy

As most of us have read his novel, Fahrenheit 451, we have had a taste of his writing style; the majority of readers hated his style, while I loved it. Although his writing is often complicated, his diction high and his thoughts sporadic, I think his writing style is my favorite. Crazy recognizes crazy, and I can say for certain that Ray Bradbury is crazy. The word crazy often has a negative connotation accompanying it. I reject this idea; from personal experience, being crazy is the most interesting way to live life. My labeling of Ray Bradbury as crazy is not meant as an insult or slander. I'm just calling a spade a spade.

(All examples come from his novel Something Wicked This Way Comes)

1. The creatures within the story
The story of Something Wicked This Way Comes revolves around a mysterious circus that brings forth many strange creatures from Bradbury's mind. The most prevalent character that I find interest in is the main antagonist, Mr. Dark. Mr. Dark is described  "Mr. Dark scuttled a tarantula hand up an electric brass switch."(Bradbury 111). When I read the story, I picture Mr. Dark as a towering man, with tattoos splattered across his body. He can reverse his age to take the appearance of another person. He is ultimately threatening. From what mind must this character have sprung from I do not know.

2. Incoherent description
As you read Something Wicked This Way Comes, you will find that Bradbury will describe events, characters and situations with such a weird approach. He will make the loosest connections that somehow make sense, although no sane person would ever contrive. A prime example of this is a description of the night; "The night was sweet with the dust of autumn leaves that smelled as if the fine sands of ancient Egypt were drifting to dunes beyond the town."(Bradbury 133). What? Somehow that makes sense but it doesn't. Such a strange use of senses to connect two ideas loosely.

3.Premise of the novel
Now as you read the novel, you sort of lose track of the big picture. As you travel through the novel, you observe the wacky and insane sights, you eventually forget them and lose sight of the big picture. But once you remember, you realize what a crazy and wild ride it has been. Here is a recap of my progress of the novel so far: Jim and Will, two kids in small town America, travel to a mysterious circus where they witness a man reverse his age from 27 to 12. After they freak out (which of course you would) The man gathers his crew of freaks and mutants to find the boys who know their secret. one thousand year old mummies, flying witches, fire jugglers all chase two children. When you look back on it, yeah, it's crazy.

4. Dashes of deep philosophy sprinkled with Horror and Fantasy
The novel so far is extremely good. I love going on this adventure with Bradbury, as he paints this world in front of you. However, throughout the novel, you get to see his philosophical side come out. This would be fine if it were tied with the story well. However the only purpose of chapter 28 seems to be to express Bradbury's opinion on morality.You know it's going to be a long chapter when the chapter begins with "Dad? Am I a good person?"(Bradbury 133). This passage is followed by 2 pages of a father explaining  his stance on humanity. This novel is contrived of dark horror and fantasy, but enough crazy to involve philosophy.

5.Readers perception of novel
Now I honestly could not tell you the theme of Something Wicked This Way Comes. There is an amazing story line, however every time I put it under a microscope, I can't figure out the purpose of the novel. With most novels, there is a flaw of society that is scrutinized or some deeper meaning that you can take away from it; some life lesson. This is not the case with this novel. This is simply two children being chased by ghouls and goblins. Ray Bradbury was releasing the demons within his mind with this novel.

The idea of Ray Bradbury being crazy is very important.It allows you to see the mind set of the author, and to further explore his work. I can relate to being crazy, and when I read his novels, I connect with him. When you outline every piece of evidence, you can determine someones sanity. There is nothing wrong with being insane, in fact, I wish more people were.

Blog 5: Thoughts on Non-fiction

In my mind, if a book is labeled as a memoir, every detail and experience that the writer writes about must be true. As for Non-fiction, I believe if the major story elements are true, but some minor details such as dialogue or insignificant actions are made up, the story retains some credibility . Non-fiction should be written as it occurred, and should have no significant changes to the story.

I don't believe that half-truths are ok within a good story if the story labels itself a memoir. Every part of a memoir should be true. It does matter if memoirists bent their stories to make it more interesting, because it breaks the category of memoir.

I don't believe David Shields is right. Yes, I agree that a book doesn't absolutely need to be associated with a certain genre, but basic categorization is needed. It's the difference between Fiction and non-fiction, not Magic Realism and Fantasy, that matter. This basic characterization is what draws readers to a certain novel.

Blog post #4: Movie Adaptation

The book I chose for book 2 of Best Sellers is No Country For Old Men by Cormac McCarthy, which has been made into a critically acclaimed movie. Although I am only 2/3 of the way completed with the novel, so far the movie is a thousand times better. The film makers really took a chance by using this book. There are many hurtles to overcome in the adaptation of No Country For Old Men; The boring dialogue between characters who don't matter at all, the horrible description in the novel and the amount of unexciting content. The essential plot was kept the same, it's still the same cartel massacre that the book told, yet huge amounts of dialogue were cut out between the sheriffs and Moss's wife.
There were many important scenes that were kept the same, such as the finding of the cartel money which creates the conflict of the main story. The first scene was pretty phenomenal as well, because it shows the pure evil of the main antagonist, Chigurh. Now this scene isn't necessary at all for the plot, yet it is probably my most favorite scene in a book, It starts with Chigurh sitting in handcuffs, and strangling a deputy to escape. This is important because it draws interest to his character, and trust me, he is the only character you will care about. Another scene that was edited, but not entirely cut out was the shoot out at a hotel where Moss, the man who stole the cartels money, stayed. In the book, Moss gets injured severely, and leaves to a hospital. In the movie he simply appears all bandaged up the next day. This scene is important because in the midst of the gunfight, Moss hides the drug money.
Many scenes were cut in the film adaptation, including a meeting with Moss's wife and the sheriff. In the meeting, the sheriff simply tells her that Moss is messing with dangerous people and will probably die, which is completely useless in the movie because within the first 10 minutes Chigurh, the cartel hitman, kills two innocent people. Another scene that was cut was when Moss gets shot and ends up in the hospital. There in the hospital, a man named Wells tries to make a deal with Moss in exchange for the money, but Chigurh kills Wells. I can understand why this scene was cut, because at this point in the story, we've already established the Chigurh is the coolest character.

Blog 3, First Book Project.

For those of us who absolutely adored The Night Circus by Erin Morgenstern, we long for more interaction. The book ends rather openly, with the surviving of the circus being apparent. This is proven with the ending, where the 2nd point of view gives you a card with Baily@nightcircus.com when most of the book took place in the early 20th century. I have thought of a grand idea to extend the interaction.

"The circus arrives without warning" (Morgenstern 2), one of the most famous lines of the book. I think that we can bridge the gap between fiction and reality with the creation of the actual night circus. The book can become what is real, not just a fantasy.

The Night Circus has a heavy emphasis on setting, for it is what is used to progress the story. The setting is obviously a circus, but it is no ordinary circus. The circus has a strict color scheme of black and white, to give the feeling of being in a dream. The idea of a dream is very crucial to The Night Circus. "We lead strange lives, chasing our dreams around from place to place." (Morgenstern 440)

The circus is composed of black and white tents, with each one holding their own unique experience.
The tents can vary in size, from being only a few meters tall to being upwards of 25 meters. Their cloth is painted with simple black and white stripes. There is no detailed left untouched, even the ground is painted in such a way that it mimics the stripes. The center piece is the bonfire, although rather than putting out the familiar color of orange and red, it spits out white fire. The bonfire later becomes  a key element to the story.

How would this creation become reality? Well there are some tents that use "magic", which is obviously fictional, but the structures, the performances, the atmosphere can be created. "This is not magic. This is the way the world is, only very few people take the time to stop and note it." (Morgenstern 504). The construction would be relatively simple, you would just need regular circus tents that are painted a different color. On thing that would prove rather difficult is that in The Night Circus, the circus travels.

Sketch of The Night Circus:

 

I believe this would widen the audience of the book immensely. When people can experience tangible references to something they love, their connection only grows stronger. It also allows new visitors to experience the setting first, and then they can read about the back story. If such a place could be created, it would be the closet thing to a dream you could experience

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

post #2 What is a book?

Let me begin with my definition of a book: I define a book as ideas that are recorded. I worded that so broadly so I could include art books, graphic novels, children books, plays, manuscripts, really anything that can be recorded. Books are a way of expressing ideas and concepts, and I believe that it doesn't matter what form you read the information in. It could be an Ipad or a 50 year old book, you're still receiving the same information. It would be similar to saying "Well I don't listen to my Ipod because I don't have the physical CD, it doesn't feel the same." It doesn't matter how you listen, you're still listening.

I must admit, I am a bit of an amateur collector of many things, Including classic books, comic books, and graphic novels. There is no way you could ever brag about having Volume one of a superman comic in your digital library. The physical aspect of a book matters almost exclusively to collectors or the super controlling reader. You could still read a comic book in digital form, you'd still receive the same information, just not the same sentimental level. The digital copy of "Lord of the Flies" will contain the same story, same characters, same setting as the physical copy, with the only exception of you not being able to hold it.

Another point to be made is the welfare of the author. You might argue that the author's vision isn't realized when it's read online, I'd argue the opposite. When it comes to digital publishing, the author has an extremely high chance of the book being published, being their own work. With physical copies, the author must go through a publisher, which often contains an editor who cuts and rips out parts of the story to try to maximize profits. Which one would you prefer? I would rather my work be my own than for a man to mutilate my work in the name of greed. But hey, that's just me.

Digital copies also make it more convenient for travelers and people who are generally busy. If you decide to read a physical copy, you must carry the physical copy, sit down, and read. With a digital copy, you can carry hundreds of books, all at your finger tips. If you have the digital copies of say an Ipad, you can mix in reading with your entertainment device, which might attract people who don't read much.

Post #1 Why I read

           I read because it allows me to draw inspiration from other people, other stories and some books simply give you advice. For example, I bought Dr. Phil McGraw's book, "Life Code", mainly as a joke, but as I continue to read it, I find myself taking it seriously. Writing and reading go hand and hand, so as both an aspiring writer and avid book reader, I can use writing techniques I find in popular novels and incorporate them into my own novel. And less importantly, reading is something you can do to pass the time.
            Books are one of, if not the most important things that humans have ever conceived. Books allow for the transfer of knowledge and ideas, some of which are powerful enough to shape the world. Other's such as "Twilight" or "The Hunger Games" are mainly works of fiction, which are meant to be read for entertainment. But if you look closely at some stories, you can make connections to our world today, and that is such a valuable thing.