![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Birthday wishes
Nov. 28th, 2008 07:17 pmHappy birthday ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
fangirlsdaja!
fangirlsdaja!Nov. 28th, 2008
Beggars in Spain, by Nancy Kress
Nov. 28th, 2008 09:05 pmBeggars in Spain
by Nancy Kress
438 pages (paperback)
Genre: Fiction/SF
Leisha Camden is the first ever Sleepless, a genetically engineered human who requires no sleep and is thus twice as productive. Drew Arlen is a Liver, part of the sedentary voting populace--not a donkey actually running government, god forbid--who invents his own identity as the Dreamer. Miri Sharifi is ironically like Leisha, the first Superbright, born on Sanctuary orbital as granddaughter to Leisha's longtime enemy Jennifer Sharifi. Beggars in Spain is divided into four sections, and it is really four linked stories arranged in chronological order with reoccuring characters. The divisions are most apparent after one finishes reading, a testament to the writing's flow.
This novel is truly a work of literature, from the multiple character foils (Leisha and her twin Sleeper sister Alice, Leisha and fellow but opposite Sleepless Jennifer Sharifi, Leisha and Jennifer's Superbright granddaughter Miri, Miri and Jennifer, Richard and his son Ricky, Joan and Alice...) to the themes--nothing new for SF but placed in a new context--revolving around things like governmental philosophy. I especially enjoyed the metatext regarding socialism as symbolized by Sanctuary, the orbital home of the Sleepless led by Jennifer, who is herself a fascinating character study.
I read the first hundred pages of the book about six months ago, but put it down and promptly ignored its existence, as is my wont. I picked it back up on a whim and was engrossed despite having forgotten both background and context. The science behind the fiction is well-thought-out and plausible (to a scientifically-illiterate lit geek who can at least spot hand-wavy BS). I loved the string-thoughts of the Superbrights and spent ten minutes poring over Miri's first explanation complete with chart. Even though I am sometimes doubtful of Kress's connections in that first example, I understand and appreciate the concept's originality.
Beggars in Spain is the best piece of hard SF I've read yet, though I'm not as well-read in SF as in fantasy; complete with Kress's remarkably sympathetic characters, I think her novel is deserving of both the Hugo and the Nebula won. And I can't wait to read the sequel, Beggars and Choosers, even though I've heard that it isn't as brilliant as its predecessor.
by Nancy Kress
438 pages (paperback)
Genre: Fiction/SF
Leisha Camden is the first ever Sleepless, a genetically engineered human who requires no sleep and is thus twice as productive. Drew Arlen is a Liver, part of the sedentary voting populace--not a donkey actually running government, god forbid--who invents his own identity as the Dreamer. Miri Sharifi is ironically like Leisha, the first Superbright, born on Sanctuary orbital as granddaughter to Leisha's longtime enemy Jennifer Sharifi. Beggars in Spain is divided into four sections, and it is really four linked stories arranged in chronological order with reoccuring characters. The divisions are most apparent after one finishes reading, a testament to the writing's flow.
This novel is truly a work of literature, from the multiple character foils (Leisha and her twin Sleeper sister Alice, Leisha and fellow but opposite Sleepless Jennifer Sharifi, Leisha and Jennifer's Superbright granddaughter Miri, Miri and Jennifer, Richard and his son Ricky, Joan and Alice...) to the themes--nothing new for SF but placed in a new context--revolving around things like governmental philosophy. I especially enjoyed the metatext regarding socialism as symbolized by Sanctuary, the orbital home of the Sleepless led by Jennifer, who is herself a fascinating character study.
I read the first hundred pages of the book about six months ago, but put it down and promptly ignored its existence, as is my wont. I picked it back up on a whim and was engrossed despite having forgotten both background and context. The science behind the fiction is well-thought-out and plausible (to a scientifically-illiterate lit geek who can at least spot hand-wavy BS). I loved the string-thoughts of the Superbrights and spent ten minutes poring over Miri's first explanation complete with chart. Even though I am sometimes doubtful of Kress's connections in that first example, I understand and appreciate the concept's originality.
Beggars in Spain is the best piece of hard SF I've read yet, though I'm not as well-read in SF as in fantasy; complete with Kress's remarkably sympathetic characters, I think her novel is deserving of both the Hugo and the Nebula won. And I can't wait to read the sequel, Beggars and Choosers, even though I've heard that it isn't as brilliant as its predecessor.
The Scarlet Letter
by Nathaniel Hawthorne
341 pages (hardcover)
Genre: Fiction/Literary/Historical
A mandatory read, and given its exalted position in the Western literary canon, I don't regret having read this; but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Hawthorne's style is way too ostentatious. I appreciate the literary depth but the actual story could have been much better told in a different (concise) style. Even if one refuses to sacrifice imagery, certain word choices are just ridiculous.
What, you don't know already know the plot of The Scarlet Letter? Hester Prynne, a young Puritan wife sent to the New World whose husband is presumed lost at sea, commits adultery and gives birth to a daughter she names Pearl. The main action takes place when Hester's husband (going under the name Roger Chillingworth) arrives in the colony on the same day she is enduring her decreed punishment--to stand upon the village scaffold for three hours at noon, and to wear a scarlet letter A upon her breast for the rest of her life. The town's favorite young minister, Arthur Dimmesdale, is also involved...
Is this good literature? Sure. Is this a good novel? I would argue no. For one, the plot is suspiciously coincidental and sometimes frustratingly implausible. How does Hester just happen to be walking in the town at midnight when Dimmesdale decides to go stand on the scaffold? Having decided to give in to temptation and leave the colony, why does Dimmesdale still not have the courage to tell Chillingworth to bugger off? As a reader, the plot left me unsatisfied.
Of course, on a literary level there is much to contemplate. I am in turns appreciative of and disturbed at Hawthorne's underlying message, whatever it may be. He obviously championed truth and justice, as idealized/idolized/symbolized in Pearl; but did he truly condemn Hester and Dimmesdale's relationship, to the point that they would never meet in Heaven? The couple is buried apart in the end, their ashes unmixed, but in a Puritan cemetery--and Hawthorne shows little support for the Puritan definition of morality. And if both Hester and Dimmesdale go to Heaven, where each will be eternally happy, then shouldn't they have to be together, in order to fulfill said requirement of eternal happiness? A part of me wishes that Hawthorne were secretly a progressive who wanted to show that adultery in certain circumstances isn't always EVIL and SINFUL; but the conventional lit mind points out all of Pearl's "punishments" aimed at Hester and Dimmesdale.
In the end, I remain ambivalent save for one point: Hawthorne needed to study the perils of purple prose. Enough said.
by Nathaniel Hawthorne
341 pages (hardcover)
Genre: Fiction/Literary/Historical
A mandatory read, and given its exalted position in the Western literary canon, I don't regret having read this; but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Hawthorne's style is way too ostentatious. I appreciate the literary depth but the actual story could have been much better told in a different (concise) style. Even if one refuses to sacrifice imagery, certain word choices are just ridiculous.
What, you don't know already know the plot of The Scarlet Letter? Hester Prynne, a young Puritan wife sent to the New World whose husband is presumed lost at sea, commits adultery and gives birth to a daughter she names Pearl. The main action takes place when Hester's husband (going under the name Roger Chillingworth) arrives in the colony on the same day she is enduring her decreed punishment--to stand upon the village scaffold for three hours at noon, and to wear a scarlet letter A upon her breast for the rest of her life. The town's favorite young minister, Arthur Dimmesdale, is also involved...
Is this good literature? Sure. Is this a good novel? I would argue no. For one, the plot is suspiciously coincidental and sometimes frustratingly implausible. How does Hester just happen to be walking in the town at midnight when Dimmesdale decides to go stand on the scaffold? Having decided to give in to temptation and leave the colony, why does Dimmesdale still not have the courage to tell Chillingworth to bugger off? As a reader, the plot left me unsatisfied.
Of course, on a literary level there is much to contemplate. I am in turns appreciative of and disturbed at Hawthorne's underlying message, whatever it may be. He obviously championed truth and justice, as idealized/idolized/symbolized in Pearl; but did he truly condemn Hester and Dimmesdale's relationship, to the point that they would never meet in Heaven? The couple is buried apart in the end, their ashes unmixed, but in a Puritan cemetery--and Hawthorne shows little support for the Puritan definition of morality. And if both Hester and Dimmesdale go to Heaven, where each will be eternally happy, then shouldn't they have to be together, in order to fulfill said requirement of eternal happiness? A part of me wishes that Hawthorne were secretly a progressive who wanted to show that adultery in certain circumstances isn't always EVIL and SINFUL; but the conventional lit mind points out all of Pearl's "punishments" aimed at Hester and Dimmesdale.
In the end, I remain ambivalent save for one point: Hawthorne needed to study the perils of purple prose. Enough said.
The Nine Tailors, by Dorothy Sayers
Nov. 28th, 2008 09:32 pmThe Nine Tailors
by Dorothy Sayers
397 pages (trade paperback)
Genre: Fiction/Mystery/Historical
In The Nine Tailors, Lord Peter Wimsey visits a small village called Fenchurch St. Paul. A mystery is afoot, of course. The bells, to whom the title refers, play a major role that I didn't "get" until the second last page of the book, and even then I didn't truly appreciate their significance to the theme. Apparently this is part of a linked series, in which case--oops. But Sayers did not click for me on several levels, so I don't think it would have made a difference.
I want to say the style is hard-boiled noir--it is so very British--but the murder is not as important as in typical noir pieces. In fact, the mystery itself is secondary to the process of solving said mystery. This is a very different book from the typical historical mysteries, dense with assumptions of knowledge like how a church bell-tower is structured. And the plot is simply not compelling to me, although I admire Sayer's command of plotting and can see why others appreciate her so much. She is dissimilar to, yet much the same as, Agatha Christie; Christie also plots complexly but manages to make them more accessible--both ouvres have a distinctly British feel that I enjoy on a meta level but cannot make up for lack of plot or character engagement.
Major ROT13 spoilers: Fb gur oryyf xvyyrq Qrnpba--vf gung npghnyyl cbffvoyr? V jnfa'g njner gung ivoengvbaf/unezbal pbhyq or sngny. Vg svgf cresrpgyl jvgu gur erfg bs gur cybg ohg V unir gebhoyr oryvrivat va gur cynhfvovyvgl bs npghnyyl qlvat sebz oryy-evatvat. Jrveq.
In conclusion, an excellent and deep piece of literature, though not one that I particularly care to read again. The ending is cool in a fun-fact kind of way but, unless you're a true mystery fan, not worth plodding through 400 pages of labyrinthe story to find out. YMMV, as I know many on my flist will disagree vehemently in comments (I look forward to the discussion!).
by Dorothy Sayers
397 pages (trade paperback)
Genre: Fiction/Mystery/Historical
In The Nine Tailors, Lord Peter Wimsey visits a small village called Fenchurch St. Paul. A mystery is afoot, of course. The bells, to whom the title refers, play a major role that I didn't "get" until the second last page of the book, and even then I didn't truly appreciate their significance to the theme. Apparently this is part of a linked series, in which case--oops. But Sayers did not click for me on several levels, so I don't think it would have made a difference.
I want to say the style is hard-boiled noir--it is so very British--but the murder is not as important as in typical noir pieces. In fact, the mystery itself is secondary to the process of solving said mystery. This is a very different book from the typical historical mysteries, dense with assumptions of knowledge like how a church bell-tower is structured. And the plot is simply not compelling to me, although I admire Sayer's command of plotting and can see why others appreciate her so much. She is dissimilar to, yet much the same as, Agatha Christie; Christie also plots complexly but manages to make them more accessible--both ouvres have a distinctly British feel that I enjoy on a meta level but cannot make up for lack of plot or character engagement.
Major ROT13 spoilers: Fb gur oryyf xvyyrq Qrnpba--vf gung npghnyyl cbffvoyr? V jnfa'g njner gung ivoengvbaf/unezbal pbhyq or sngny. Vg svgf cresrpgyl jvgu gur erfg bs gur cybg ohg V unir gebhoyr oryvrivat va gur cynhfvovyvgl bs npghnyyl qlvat sebz oryy-evatvat. Jrveq.
In conclusion, an excellent and deep piece of literature, though not one that I particularly care to read again. The ending is cool in a fun-fact kind of way but, unless you're a true mystery fan, not worth plodding through 400 pages of labyrinthe story to find out. YMMV, as I know many on my flist will disagree vehemently in comments (I look forward to the discussion!).