Just gorgeous. What a fantastic person, who for all his maddening idiosyncracies, was passionately honest and deeply in love with the natural world. HJust gorgeous. What a fantastic person, who for all his maddening idiosyncracies, was passionately honest and deeply in love with the natural world. He’s the perfect letter writer, being keenly aware of the strange, joyful new moments everyday and deeply interested in people and other creatures…
His searing sarcasm and strong opinions are very refreshing, especially if you're used to the whitewashed, please-don't- sue-me style of contemporary writers. It's oddly satisfying to read someone who hates as sincerely as he loves. When he's angry, bitter, joyful, sad, amused he expresses it completely, either good and mad, poisonously vitriolic or entranced with tiny natural details.
I regret the smallminded nastiness he endured in his search to show sexual meaning in art. At times he was portrayed as some sort of monster for daring to write about the reality of the human body without coyness, hypocrisy or grossness, and it's evident that this hurt him at times. If that interests you his epilogue ' a propos Lady Chatterley's Lover' is great....more
This was quite difficult to read. A lot of words are stated twice in one sentence and the grammar and word order is jarring.
The author refers to oldeThis was quite difficult to read. A lot of words are stated twice in one sentence and the grammar and word order is jarring.
The author refers to older relatives with esoteric interests; this doesn't indicate a direct link to, or authority on, the distant past, as the New Age movement has origins as far back as the Victorian era. It is also unclear which of her points are based on family teachings and which are her ideas, which would hace been interesting to know.
A fantasy of Celtic myth seems to have such a strong hold on people that many will contort themselves to cram it in to their work, or claim it 'intuitively', rather than build up from what we do know archaeologically and from historical sources . We seem to be near the point where Celtic Revivalism is eating itself, and becoming a sort of amorpheous porridge which only refers to its own footnotes.
The nature and folklore inserts are an enjoyable read, and lyrically written in a friendly and accessible way. I liked the natural history associations, especially the natural properties of the plants. The separately labelled concepts are creative and interesting suggestions as to apply these to creative spiritual work, using the physical properties as jumping-off points. I also liked the pieces of historical info.
There are some random bits that have no apparent historical or folkloric link. Some classic folk stories are mentioned only in passing, but advice to 'look it up in Google' misses the point of buying a book and these days tends to be a given.
There is also an issue with image quality, with a lot of jagged edges on the illustrations.
I do appreciate Celtic folklore is a difficult choice as little of it remains, and that to create a structure means something more must be worked in.
If it was described as a fantasia on tree-myth it would be great; it's the assumption of authority that is inappropriate. Sentier says at the end that 'no one really knows' the origins of Ogham, which is true, but also puts Graves on a level with scholars- the assumption being one guess is as good as another. There is a defensiveness against critique that appears quite closed-minded at its worst.
Sentier says the final 5 line riddle of the Song of Amergin is a 'watchword' for different Ogham/ trees. This is a big stretch- especially since the Ogham have more than 5 types.
Quite a lot of this refers back to Robert Graves- the translation is credited to him, and most likely the interpretation too. To be fair to the writer he was regarded as an authority on Celtic myth by reviewers and literary readers (but not by scholars who devoted their lives to studying the subject). As his writing style and language skills were decent, people credited his dodgy interpretations too.
For example, with Amergin Graves rearranged the lines, added new lines entirely and altered the number of staves, even inventing lines, manipulating lines to describe his fictionalized calendar, ignoring the few known Celtic holy days and calendar structure. At this point it is difficult to know why the term Celtic is used at all, as he desired something very different.
There's a lot of statements about what the Celts believed which are not documented; perhaps Neo-Celtic or New Age Celtic-Inspired would be a more illuminating term. Historically there is now doubt as to whether the Celts ever existed as a distinct group. Obviously there is no actual link between the Celts and the much later belief in planetary correspondences, and it's odd to compare an invented term to Navajo myth, giving an unfortunate impression that all cultures are a soup of equivalents.
Using the term Shaman for English/Irish work is also contradictory. 'Other' traditions are drafted in a lot to plug gaps. This New Age tendency shows an odd lack of respect for the culture and at its worst erases it. A shaman is central to a specific society and defined as such by them; a new age western shaman is self-claimed and is not the first port of call for locals in need of help.
I admit to believing esoteric work is still subject to laws of coherent internal structure, and strongly prefer either folkloric history or inspiring imaginative works which are very clear about the element of invention. Therefore I am not the target audience for this book and find it somewhat difficult to review on its own terms. This one falls somewhat awkwardly between the two. It is difficult to 'take off' from unsound ground; I think the problem is that the intuitive is mixed with historical fact, with some inaccuracy and forced associations; this makes the imaginative side sometimes feel in bad faith despite its lyricism.
It is still an interesting read, even if you don't agree with it. I feel it works best as a book-of-days-like exploration of qualities you could choose and apply in your own work, with some visualisation exercises, rather than a whole system.
The author has a love for trees, folklore and living things which comes through in the work. In this age it is certainly an important thing to learn to befriend and respect natural things, without exploitation . I thought her sympathetic ideas on the myth of Blodeuedd was a fair one, with a sense of the complex undertones of folk tales. Finally, I feel her suggestion that this process is *fun* bears much more weight than the silly references to 'kenning' processes and cunning-folk- it's good for you to play with your imagination, and rediscover the 'serious' or 'deep' play that was so absorbing as a child....more
The Wraethu are dominant here, whereas the human race are failing, but amusingly reliant on them. It' s somewhat like an Earthly colonial, predatory eThe Wraethu are dominant here, whereas the human race are failing, but amusingly reliant on them. It' s somewhat like an Earthly colonial, predatory elite, but uses religion traditionally suppressed by them.
Wraethu culture mixes parts of a lot of very different Earth elements, including the Hindu caste system, tantric sex, Buddhist practises, Western Occultism, Existentialism, historical racial genocide, cults, body horror, erotica, Catholic ritual and Anne Rice-inspired vampirism. Some people will like this dramatic mix, others may find it somewhat puzzling especially as it presents a lot of world culture as alien and amorpheus.
Of course cultures do rise, fall, and influence each other. So in this sense it is accurate.
The Wraethu contradict themself- each claims to follow the 'true' path or to all have superior morals, but this only extends to their own kind. Constantine has a pessimistic view of human nature, which makes her books more uncomfortable but also more interesting to read. The book partly describes the alteration and genocide of humans- it could be read as evolution, or a parallel for the way many humans now exploit each other and the natural world.
I'm thinking of Pratchett's humorous points on 'good' and 'superior' elves, and Wells' Eloi and Morlocks. To me the magical, beautiful, Elvish others in stories sometimes give out creepily eugenic vibes. Constantine acknowledges this, I think. There is often something disturbing about Utopia, with squelchy foundations.
It's not really a political book, though, as events are shown through a sensual, personal lens. This first book only had one (minor) female character, and all the characters were hostile to women. The description of the characters as hermaphrodite is only true in the reproductive sense, not in the social or visible physical sense. Males adopting a childbearing role are the most stigmatized. It's a gay male fantasia rather than a world of dual-sexed humans, and I agree with the omnibus viewer who felt something interesting was lost in the failure to address the hint of female extinction.
At points I felt as if I was eating a potent and indigestible soup, made of very strong pickled herring, chocolate pudding, and Stilton cheese. It started feeling fresh, but became exhausting after the first third, with almost physical claustrophobia. Little things distracted me, mostly minor jarring omissions and sequence errors.
However, I did like a lot of the characters- there was a tendency for them to 'merge' and lose their individuality, but Pellaz was a good choice for narrator. He was funny, good-natured and observant. I'm not sure I will like the next Calanthe- POV books as he is a difficult character to like.
I also loved the fact that Constantine created a world populated by gay (and in some readings transgender) characters that spans such a long series.
There aren't many such characters in fantasy fiction and this book was way ahead of its time in that regard. Admittedly I am not transgender so if you, are can't say for *sure* you would like it, but I think it could definitely be worth a try. There aren't any slurs that I can see and it has some really interesting characters and a radically different society which might be quite life- affirming to live in for a while
...definitely as a bi woman it was intriguing albeit a bit frustrating. Although it erases a substantial chunk of womanhood it offers fascinating ideas about gender roles that more than compensate.
In a lot of ways it's not that well written, but it's competent and is fantastically weird, especially the descriptions of alternative biology and alternate sexes/gender roles which are really creative and unusual to the point of inducing squeamishness. There is also a running theme exploring what a world means where monogamous love is taboo - how it can be both beautiful and highly destructive to communities. In a genre full of boring romance this perspective is pretty thought- provoking despite having a fanfictiony- vibe at times....more
This is a great library book I'm currently reading- I really like that it has info about Turkish culture and customs as well as typical marketplace itThis is a great library book I'm currently reading- I really like that it has info about Turkish culture and customs as well as typical marketplace items. I am also hopeful the detailed bulgur wheat instructions will improve my cooking!...more
Gah. This one is very difficult to review. Jarman is a great writer, fluid, vivid and with an eye for funny, lively text. I'd have given this 5 for hiGah. This one is very difficult to review. Jarman is a great writer, fluid, vivid and with an eye for funny, lively text. I'd have given this 5 for his description of gay life in his era, especially for his account of the AIDS crisis, his friends, surroundings, and the inspiring way gay people shared information on the virus to protect themselves- their info network was far better than the nonsense peddled by the papers. In some ways he was very forward-thinking and independent, seeing labels as restrictive. He was a vibrant visual thinker, but was also good with text, which is an rare quality to have.
His bravery in being open about his HIV+ status was deeply admirable, and his political commitment to making queerness safer has a refreshing candour, joy in life and optimism. His examples of the poisonous cruelty towards HIV and AIDS victims in the 80s are both shocking and saddening to read. I feel the historical difficulties of gay men is often forgotten , and a lot of this book is a good reminder of what they endured. He doesn't ignore class discrimination- there were plenty of gay men embedded in the political, royal and religious establishment, but few out, and it was evidently easier to evade the system when you were a part of it. He also points out the hypocrisy of many straight 'moral crusaders' aptly.
But.
I was seriously pissed off by his one defence of older men screwing underage boys- it was seriously creepy at worst, and idiotically naiive at best. I strongly believe that consent laws are appropriate and that his cherry-picked examples ignore the vulnerability of young people and would harm young gay men infinitely more than it could help them. Hence the low review, as I can't give separate ratings for each bit of the book. It's always good to provoke discussion, but he seemed so blinkered on the subject in his own favour.
He conflates different issues, such as bracketing a contemporary child abuse court case with general persecution against gay men. This seems to me to be incredibly stupid, and lacking compassion for the young victim.
I say this as a bisexual woman- I strongly believe in support and visibility for queer/gay people, but being an apologist for child abuse should never be a part of this, and gives a negative effect to the gay community at large, most of whom don't agree with it. Creepy fetishisation of youth has always annoyed me, so maybe I am not the target audience of this book! It doesn't help that Jarman followed the 80s scene habit of calling every below-25 year old a 'boy', which, taken with his ill-advised ideas, I found irritating and bothersome.
If you want to read something by Jarman, I'd suggest Chroma instead, which is beautifully-written, sensitive, evocative and more personal....more
Beautifully written, especially if you love the sight, smell and tastes of the sea. I loved the character Vinca; a vividly describA few spoilers here!
Beautifully written, especially if you love the sight, smell and tastes of the sea. I loved the character Vinca; a vividly described enigmatic tomboy of 15. Her friend Philippe was hard to like- he was pompous and frankly quite boring, which caused my interest to lapse during his POV. It also showed that damn gangly awkwardness you feel in adolescence, the intense awareness and strangeness.
The little cruelties of adulthood are hinted at here- 16 year old Philippe is seduced by a creepy older woman which affects his relationship with Vinca. It's also quite unusual and refreshing in that it emphasises the vulnerability of young men rather than casting them as predators.
The ambiguity at the end made me wonder; Philippe initiates Vinca but there's a hint that she is later 'doomed' and standing tearfully at her window. Could this suggest pregnancy, I wonder?...more
I see why this book was not considered Woolf's best; it's long and ponderous, and can drag after a while. It is a tiring but fascinating read. The wriI see why this book was not considered Woolf's best; it's long and ponderous, and can drag after a while. It is a tiring but fascinating read. The writing style is a mix of her conventional early work and time-jumping, impressionistic later books. She uses landscape descriptions at the start of all chapters (repeating this idea from The Waves).
However I like it far more than The Waves ( her most acclaimed novel). It has much more interesting and unique characters and a sense of purpose. I could empathise with almost all the characters except the irritatingly idealized Eleanor.
It begins with the stultifying atmosphere of Victorian England, folllowing multiple characters in chronological order until the 'present day'. What is likeable from the start is the variety of viewpoints- Woolf seemed to be expanding her view from the individual for the world at this point. She follows the consciousness of an old patriarch, a scared child, a downtrodden servant, spoilt businessmen, a feminist revel, a middle claas do- gooder, detached scholars, a society hostess and a disabled, eccentric young girl among others.
At first it seems to explore the nature of time. As you continue it becomes more obvious that all the characters are damaged by society in different ways. Even the financially and socially dominant patriarch has to hide parts of himself, with hidden vulnerabilities and kindnesses.
It has really good characterisation which uses dialogue and actions to evoke a feel of the individual. It is subtle and rings true.
Although it starts with the obvious imprisonment of Victorian life, more subtle traps show up throughout- traps of poverty, nostalgia, rigid moralism, detachment, wealth, status, sexuality. gender and age.
I really like it partly because Woolf is looking out to the world more, opening up to realities of war, social welfare, feminist campaigning, changing moral codes and the selfish side of family life. She keeps her lyrical style, but is distilling more varied experiences than usual and is branching out past the ideal. It's more readable than previous books and hence more conventional, but is politically far more unconventional that her previous stories of rich musing ladies. The nearest comparison would maybe be To The Lighthouse, which has more beauty. perhaps this is why The Years is less popular, as it was largely set in dingy Victorian houses and slums.
I wish we could have seen more from her after this. She and Leonard Woolf had a relatively low opinion of this book, but it felt to me as if she was verging on breaking through to new horizons, and maybe a dramatic change of style, with this book being a bridge between them.
Sonehow it reminds me of Ted Hughes writing that the strain of an intense literary transformation could have affected Plath's equilibrium. Woolf suffered from intense depression and self doubt after writing this book and died not long after publication. A process of change can be a difficult time. Nevertheless it was a wonderful achievement....more
As with a lot of her work, the plot is deceptively simple but holds a lot of insight into human feeling. It's a rather sad book, dealing with a stage As with a lot of her work, the plot is deceptively simple but holds a lot of insight into human feeling. It's a rather sad book, dealing with a stage where a woman is leaving youth behind, and becoming rootless.
The 'captor' of the book, Jean, is also leaving behind the irresponsibility of youth. He could have been written as just another tediously handsome twink, but Colette writes him subtly and with sympathy. Both characters have flaws which seem organic parts of their characters.
It looks like a rather silly romance novel from the blurb; don't let that put you off. It's more than the sum of its parts, with real believable feelings and a natural world that's just as important as the characters.
It feels far more deeply felt and vulnerable than her short stories. and also somewhat crueller. There is also a sense of action and involvement that isn't on her later recollections. It's quite claustrophobic at times, being a novel with only four characters at most.
I love all her work, but this one has a lot of her best ingredients in one place!
What I love most about this book is the beautiful prose. It's precise but poetic, and has odd-but-illuminating metaphors and comparisions that make everyday experiences fresh and new....more
A chilling and timely read on the consequences of unregulated workplaces. This explores the effects of radioactive luminous paint on the health of womA chilling and timely read on the consequences of unregulated workplaces. This explores the effects of radioactive luminous paint on the health of women who worked with the materials.
Appalling but extremely enlightening, this shows a string of failures caused by greed and apathy, from lower-level supervisors to heads of corporation. The women were encouraged to moisten their lips with radium- dipped paintbrushes- it all started with a cheap, greedy instruction to save paint. Had they used water, they would have been much less affected (this is because radium particles can't easily penetrate the body but do become 'trapped' once ingested, causing massive damage).So it's partly caused by unimaginative and selfish middle-men/women, not just by big-business heads. (selfishness is not just a high-level problem here!)
I think in most modern workplaces we will have all experienced the gap between policy and real life, if not to this extent. The pressure to 'put up and shut up' is a powerful one, and is almost always related to keeping profit high.
At the end stage of this story we see that the women actually ended losing their lower jaws, suffering gradual bone crumbling, permanent open wounds and numerous forms of cancer. They aren't just shown as anonymous case histories, we follow their appearance, interests, friends, personalities and relationships. This makes it even more scary following their individual declines. We hear their own words, as well as those of their frightened and traumatized families. It is very much a personal account.
Despite this, the businesses at fault fought their minimal 'goodwill' payments so long that most victims had died before they received payment. The businesses refused 'useless' routine doctor visits and nurses, claiming they were being 'exploited' by their victims. This hypocrisy would be almost funny were it not so appalling, and shows how fast an corrupt establishment can be to frame itself as a victim, even parasitising the victims own language and frame of reference to appeal for the upper hand .
We think of GPs as all-knowing now. Yet even concerned doctors had little power without legislation to act on their findings. A doctor-PR man paid to excuse their dangerous corporation was as respected as an independent doctor warning of dangerous practises. Nowadays, think that neutrality of decision makers should be as important as role, but the slew of private funding makes this difficult in almost every area.
As depressing as this is, the tenacity of the victims who fought to be recognized is inspiring. One even had to be brought to court in bed as she was near-death but still wanted to testify. It also focuses on them as individuals which makes the sense of waste and injustice even more overehelming. Although a few media men and doctors helped to publicise their case, it was the courage of the victims to speak out - in the face of dismissive, patronizing and outright hostile attitudes that made the workplaces of radium painters safer.
I think it's important to remember this is not purely a historical problem- a quick youtube search showed at least one site remained radioactive until modern times, and efforts made to publicise this were angrily suppressed by the local government, who thought only of the impact on tourism and reputation. Again, blame was laid on those raising concerns, not on the high Geiger count around the factory and the fears of the citizens.
As late as 1978 women were being bullied into radium-painting at Ottawa's Luminous Processes, who 'wriggled out' of paying any cleanup costs and used PR-speak to deflect anyone seeking answers. Although the book is set in 1917, it is very much still a modern problem all over the world.
It's also an enlightening look at the risks of faddy, profit focused 'cures'- radioactive tonics was considered beneficial to the health for many years before the dangers were discovered. Anyone who believes in unrestricted business 'progress', or in profit- based treatment, should read this book.
Ultimately, it is encouraging, showing that persistent visibility + media can turn the tide and increase business culpability....more
I enjoyed this book a lot. Powell is bitter and aggressive but is rightly so, and her wit and resourcefulness is great. She is also open about her shoI enjoyed this book a lot. Powell is bitter and aggressive but is rightly so, and her wit and resourcefulness is great. She is also open about her shortcomings. People who complain about her anger - imagine your response to 17hr live in shifts in their own environment ;) With only half a day off per week!
It's good to see a more forceful opinion of the job- it was the only option for many women regardless of their personalities. Powell does not seem suited to the job. She wanted to be a scholar and teacher, and it is sad to see how little chance women had to use all their talents. Maybe more placid, unambitious natures found it less psychologically distressing than her.
Powell is quite fair minded and tries to give people the benefit of the doubt in retrospect- she seems to be cynical abput human nature in general, and the effect of power.
She is sympathetic to women' s rights though not a feminist as such- and considered her marriage a fair exchange of labour (seeing her work as a valuable commodity, not a romanticised virtue). As others have said she is for individual rather than collective rights, and doesn't fit into a modern middle-class Marxist hero mould.
Her husband sounds OK but quite dull and unappreciative of her skills, so marriage was probably no paradise.
A lot of lower status maids were cheap child labour-with no access to education, and no home. You had almost no power to change anything and no protective legislation. Losing your job would mean immediately losing your home and income. Even as a child, you might have the responsibility of a dependant family.
I think a lot of Downton esque programmes are a bit iffy- co-opting awful jobs and romanticising them for entertainment. This is in itself quite Victorian; the myth of the happy servant. From her progression to cook we see there is also a strict hierarchy even within the servants.
Margaret saw several outcomes of hard work- one person cared for for life by a kind employer, vs a spinster pair left in poverty by broken promises of a bequest (made to extract more work for less.).
Women were also vulnerable to sexual harassment by employers while being bombarded with patronising moral advice, probably because the rich tend to see the poor as inherently at fault. Powell's own workmate was kicked out after their employers' son got her pregnant.
In positive accounts by individuals it's easy to lose sight of the massive structural inequalities that kept people 'in their place', and the importance of reform.
There are a lot of grey areas- The writer points out intersting characters throughout- such as philathropists who help the poor (by donating old clothes to a charity) so long as they are at a distance. Some employers were bossy and cruel, some kind, and some clearly uncertain in their role. Even the harsh kitchenmaid training might benefit as well as harm them- Margaret felt she let hers down by being too lenient.
It is also interesting to see the effects on her sons. Despite managing to get to grammar school through their intelligence, they were singled out for their 'charity' boots and poor background and tormented as outsiders. Even this was fought for with reluctant officials and treated insensitively by the school.
It's true Powell's harping on bad modern food seems cliched, but is also a relevant point about factory-produced food. (Probably the nearest to modern Western servants are poorly paid food service, hospitality workers and cleaners, who still take the load off richer women.)...more
So far I have learned Merricat is not allowed to cook, handle knives, or go in their ailing uncles room. Not too hard to guess why. Most of her familySo far I have learned Merricat is not allowed to cook, handle knives, or go in their ailing uncles room. Not too hard to guess why. Most of her family died years ago in a mysterious poisoning; only her ailing uncle survives. Her POV starts as authoritative and intelligent and gradually betrays uncanny childishness and 'magical' thinking. We see the world through her eyes, feeling in sympathy with this persecuted outsider.
The mindless cruelty of the 'moral' comunity is menacing, but even casual visitors to the Blackwood house have dubiously good intent and are thrilled by the infamous history of the sisters and their late family.
Merricat idolises her beautiful older sister Constance; 'protecting' her from thr outside world. She becomes protective of her uncle Julian; offering up little tokens of goodwill.
Their peaceful isolation is disturbed by the odious Cousin Charles, a manipulative gold-digger, who has designs on Constance and her fortune. He poisons her (though only psychologically!) against the remaining pair, bullying the dying Julian and threatening Merricat with expulsion and control. He is invulnerable to art, protection, stability, music, love and beauty; caring only for money and valuable objects. In a sense he appears to offer Constance freedom, but at a cost and with no benevolent intent. He resembles her father, a greedy, cold and controlling man. He could well be seen as a second, loveless trap, rather than a rescuer.
Amazingly his spite seems far more disturbing than Merricat's lethal past; it also brings to mind all the unnamed violence and disempowerment of women, the young, the old and vulnerable, lurking in domestic history. Merry's witchcraft and murderous intent become reframed as a last resort of power for the powerless and such is the skill of the writing, we root for her and her eccentric, traumatised uncle. Their home is in one sense a prison, but in another a haven from worse prisons outside- the threat of institutionalization - an impersonal nursing home for Julian, perhaps an asylum for Merricat.
But even the multiple-murderess here is more capable of compassion than the 'normal', respectable Charles. This is an interesting thing to ponder....more
I loved Natural History of the Senses and really liked her book on Paul West's stroke. But even as a fan of both popular science, a stream-of-consciouI loved Natural History of the Senses and really liked her book on Paul West's stroke. But even as a fan of both popular science, a stream-of-consciousness thinker and a liker of Ackerman, I found this book unbearable to read in places. I made myself finish it to give it a chance, but it was hard going. Some chapters are dramatically more rewarding than others.
The first problem is that the fascination with bazillions of metaphors and similes just turns it into a hallucinogenic fantasy about Ackerman's creativity, rather than reflecting a real love for the amazing process of the brain. It confused me, being neither scientifically accurate nor pleasant to read. In fact it seemed like she wasn't really interested in her subject unless she could get as far away from it as possible. I think part of the problem may be the marketing of the book; it's labelled as a scientifically rigorous book written in a sensuous style. But Ackerman has no qualifications in neurology, and most of her listed bibliography showed old texts, most of which were second-hand metaphorical explanations much like Ackerman's own. Therefore it's more of an dense prose-poem to her consciousness, incorporating a list of inventive metaphors for brain chemistry.
While I often like some personal info in books, I really don't think a long description of Ackerman deciding she was hungry, going to get food, selecting the food and then forgetting to bring the bowl upstairs had any interest or relevance to the subject matter. You could certainly say it related to the brain, but only as much as any written piece does. In some places this is a good tactic which creates a place to breathe; in others it is merely out of place.
It seemed more like the self-centred ramblings of someone who thinks everything they do and say is a detailed explanation of the neurological process. But any one of us could think of our personal experiences; we are, after all, individual minds reading the book. I already know it's possible to feel hungry, feel moved, think and eat...what the book promised was an understanding into the actual processes. Popular science does need to have an element of clarity, and a very well-informed teller, and that's a gift not everyone has. It may because she started as a poet; the dense structure of poems does not always lend itself well to prose and can easily become exhausting after hundreds of pages, plus the selectiveness that makes poetry effective is lost in this long prose work.
Selection is such an important part of good writing. It's not enought to merely have loads of creative comparisons strung together; they all tend to blur into one if they don't have enough space. At the worst this book was completely incoherent and at best lucid and insightful when discussing more abstract concepts. I'd say it has some interesting snippets of magpie-like info padded out with lots of irrelevant filler.
There are some lovely little gems in here, so if you approach it a bit like fossil-hunting it could yield some good insights. I think Ackerman is best when the book hinges on natural history and general human motivations, and in stressing the subjectivity of human experience, rather than things at the more molecular level. She doesn't quite appreciate the beauty of occasional clarity, which suits neurological descriptions better in my opinion.
In the end I used bits of this one for collage, as there were some gems hidden among all the confusion!...more
I have read a few Murdoch novels now, and though I really enjoy them they always have the same problems. Her MO is to assembl*contains a few spoilers*
I have read a few Murdoch novels now, and though I really enjoy them they always have the same problems. Her MO is to assemble:
1. An interesting premise 2. Very good characters 3. A solid sense of reality 4. Great descriptive prose which is lyrical without being too flowery. 5. Various subtle background themes and a lot of echoes to ponder after reading.
This continues happily through about 3/4 of the book. At some point she seems either to lose interest, funding, or outright panics, suddenly accelerating all the threads into her patented Catastrophe Generator, usually by killing off the most interesting character. Then it just stops. You're left standing among the wreckage of the characters, which are gently tidied up into little heaps to finish things off. It's like being an embarassed visitor at the end of a party.
It's totally superfluous and embarrassingly heavy-handed. Victims include The Sea, The Sea, The Unicorn and The Bell, plus this book.
It's like assembling high quality ingredients, making an awesome cake from a good recipie, baking it perfectly in a very good oven, then unnacountably taking it out just before it's finished and pouring ketchup and barbeque sauce all over it.
The plot follows a group of once-radical students who are funding an epic, left wing work by their waspish friend Crimond. His book is almost perpetually unfinished, and they are getting uneasy about their financial obligations, and increasingly less left-wing as they get older and richer.
A cheating wife leaves Duncan, her self-pitying husband for a second time. Her on-off lover, the irritating political revolutionary Crimond, is the best character in the book. He isn't malevolant, but is entirely obsessed with his book and is a constant thorn in the other characters sides.
One of the friends, Jenkin, is described as the one genuinely 'good' character by the goodness-fixated Murdoch. He is very likeable but is a little forced at times. His bright, jovial eyes, perpetually crinkling and twinkling with good humour and bemusement, were a bit overenthusiastically hammered forth. He is also the most sympathetic to Crimond's revolutionary work. His friend Gerald is in love with him and eventually pleads with him to live with him as his love. Although Jenkin is straight, this becomes likely, until the awful Duncan gets involved.
Meanwhile, useless, whining Duncan has gotten his young protegee pregnant. He goes off with a gun, intending to shoot him. Instead, Crimond accidentally shoots Jenkin, who has pottered in unannounced for a chat. This seems intended to echo Greek Tragedy, but actually just conjures up vibes reminiscent of a crappy soap opera.
Probably the silliest part of this plot is the love life of Gerald. He is an extremely well-written gay charcater, written as a fully rounded, nontragic individual rather than a one-dimensional cliche (especially unusual for the time in which it was written).
After losing the new male love of his life, he immediately decides to embark upon a live-in relationship with his bland friend Rose. He does this because she is a Good Friend, which is a Good Thing. It is presented as an unquestionably positive and wise move forward.
It would also be nice to have a gay couple that isn't immediately killed off for a change. Murdoch tend to be fond of tragic gays, I tend to picture her menacingly brandishing a hatchet as soon as my gaydar goes off.
This sort of puzzled me, as if Orpheus, after losing his true love, Eurydice to the pits of the Underworld, shrugged his shoulders and wombled off with the milkman instead.
The feeling is of perpetual frustration, 'settling' for second best, including slightly regretted abortions, and slightly mismatched 'endearingly eccentric' couples.
The only really successful thing is the book written by Crimond, which has had absolutely no positive effect on anyone he knows, though it does prod Gerald out of his apathy.
The whole book ends in a kind of bland resignation which is presumably intended to represent 'goodness' and resolution, but actually comes off as rather depressing. It's a pretty good portrayal of hypocrisy, both personal and political, read as a tragicomedy
. Possibly Murdoch was trying to show the variety in romantic relationships, but this didn't complement the political book theme. Fun to read but sort of unsatisfying.
I know my gripes about this book are a bit unkind,, but it's because this book had so much potential to be really, really good, but was squashed by a ridiculous plot twist at the very end. Some of the dialogue and scenes are wonderful, especially the opening party and the scenes between Gerald and Jenkin. Murdoch is always fantastic at writing settings, and creating vivid and interesting characters. It's as if she loses confidence in her own subtlety, or the readers capacity for a complex ending....more
I found this a very funny sarcastic review of women's media.... as a kind of circus of ridiculousness that rapidly becomes alarming. I found through eI found this a very funny sarcastic review of women's media.... as a kind of circus of ridiculousness that rapidly becomes alarming. I found through experience that women's mags always make me feel depressed (and with a mysterious urge to buy crap I don't need) so gave them up years ago. Sometimes I have another try but most womens mags just don't deliver what I hoped for, not a fun diversion but an expensive advertising broadsheet with bizarre value judgements crammed in between. Of the more recent magazines Oh Comely and Bust are probably my favourites, and are slightly more likely to feature more ethnically and sexually diverse women. Nothing is ideal but there are alternatives.
if you do read fashion magazines such as Cosmo or Glamour this is a great, humorous look at some of their common themes and techniques. It's also quite a fun look into the world of advertising in general. You will probably be aware of most of their techniques already but there is something about seeing them all condensed that I found quite striking. Plus it's reassuring and refreshing to see 'truths' you always secretly mistrusted being comprehensively laughed at.
One thing I find interesting about women's magazines is they are purportedly by women for women, something we are enmeshed with, crave, but use to punish ourselves and uphold impossible standards. They aren't just imposed from the outside but are bought from choice.
The chapters cover a general overview, then the way magazines present body image, cod-science, sex, uncomfortable clothes, fashion, relationships, careers, eating habits, infantilising language and men's magazines, ending with suggestions for a new positive kind of magazine.
It does also include race and orientation now and again, ie reminding us of the racist and disturbingly eugenic base of 'ideal face shapes' which are 'always, always white', as well as the way mags ignore lesbian and bisexual women entirely. It also stresses throughout that your preferences should be respected and that there is no feminist incompatibility with stripping, waxing etc, as long as it is purely out of choice and not shaming or coercion. It also includes magazines for young girls and young women, and their benefits and disadvantages.
The sheer amount of puns got a bit exhausting, but it made me laugh a lot. As a bonus I also got a fun and informative bus conversation on South Asian gender roles with a guy who was secretly reading it over my shoulder who couldn't help laughing. (beware: reading about the minutiae of pube waxing on a crowded bus is sort of embarrassing).
It would have been good to include more about the business structures of these mags and of the market domination by just a few media corporations. Few media business magnates are female, though most of the magazine staff are. As others have said, possible solutions would have been good too. Because a lot of these profit- motivated manipulations are extending into male- consumed media it's likely to be prescient about everyone in future... I found it read best as a humour book primarily, with many important and serious points....more
* contains spoilers* I found this collection dark and beautiful, provoking many thoughts which linger after reading. There is a wide range of characte* contains spoilers* I found this collection dark and beautiful, provoking many thoughts which linger after reading. There is a wide range of characters, countries and stories; an idealistic sculptor follows the snow-white Carrera marble quarries to stumble on a village with a secret (The Quarry), a roaming young wife gets far more than she bargained for when she visits a bleak French seaside town (I Never Eat Crabmeat Now). A woman attempting to control a rat infrstation ends up living permanently aware of the horrible burden of inflicting pain on living things, and the permanent link made between perpetrator and victim. Terminal illness makes a beautiful redhead closer to her cruel, now dead mother.
Death, illness, outsiders, sexual assault and horror are constant themes made only just bearable to read by Teran's beautiful lyrical language and grim humour. Human connections bring with them an increased risk of fear or pain. The most unlikely situations seem quite normal in Teran's hands, much as they do in life.
This collection is very much concerned with dogged, quiet endurance of suffering. It's not a far stretch to call it a collection of horror stories, though thee is sometimes a hint of hope, as with the ending of The Shoes. Some tales end with a hope of reconciliation, or at least a greater level of understanding....more
**spoiler alert** It's interesting when so many people love, and I mean REALLY love a book. It really shows just how subjective reading can be. I thou**spoiler alert** It's interesting when so many people love, and I mean REALLY love a book. It really shows just how subjective reading can be. I thought all their accolades really fitted her first book Housekeeping, which was eerily lonely and beautifully written. This book, too, is beautifully written with a lovely lilting tempo. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with the words, or the tone, it's the content that I had trouble with. I found some of the characters engaging and the gentle humour was appealing.
I enjoy reading Christian mysticism but am not a Christian myself. I may therefore be missing something; perhaps this book embodies something about modern religion that people find genuinely helpful. However I found little that actually seemed religious in this book, so much as a very low-key sanctimoniousness. I liked the emphasis on the everyday nature of spirituality, but it didn't convey it to me in a convincing way.
I'm honestly bewildered by the amount of admiration the main character elicits. I do not know whether it is a personal character flaw, but I found him passive, self-reverential, priggish, ponderous, insincere and schmaltzy. Robinson is great at describing characters who are somehow out of place among their surroundings, but Ames' adoration of his wife seemed weirdly detached, as if he was watching the world through glass. This is undoubtedly an interesting perspective to follow, but I got the uneasy feeling that I was being prodded through a display-tunnel of his virtue, which was supposed to send me out with a sense of admiration and profound feeling. This is not how I felt.
Instead I felt that he was endlessly self-justifying himself; a flawed character who used the most shallowly sentimental, pseudo-meditative self-examination to avoid actually engaging with life. I wondered if Robinson wanted to point out the beauty and dignity of the every day and humdrum- this is a lovely goal but it is very difficult to achieve while also making an engaging novel.
That is not to say there needs to be rollicking drama, but repeatedly stressing the everyday 'goodness' of the character ends up quite monotonous, making it hard to see any peaks or troughs to his terrain, and his lack of action makes him almost unreal- he ended up merely irritating me, without giving any extra insight into his character. Of course good, like evil, can be banal or simple, and it is an important quality, but banal goodness simply isn't the only thing that could have been explored here. I felt like it didn't quite 'stretch' enough to make the characters seem real.
The memoir-like form of the novel may be the cause of this sense of stasis, but part of the way through the book I found it tedious and almost unbearable to continue. I did finish it, but my final impression was of admiration for Robinson's beautiful arrangement of words, mixed with a feeling of intense indigestion. Robinson has written wonderful books and has a beautiful command of language, and I am optimistic I will to read something that resonates with me better in the future. ...more
**spoiler alert** I think this is one of Murdoch's best books. The characters are all interesting and convincing individuals and it doesn't drag.
In on**spoiler alert** I think this is one of Murdoch's best books. The characters are all interesting and convincing individuals and it doesn't drag.
In one sense it's quite an ordinary, daft melodrama, but the good characterisations and symbolically significant setting lift it up to something better than the average novel.
The story starts with the apparently feckless and endearing Dora, who is returning to her critical, domineering husband, who is working on the archives of a nunnery. He is a guest in a new lay retreat founded by a gay man named Michael, who is hoping for a new virtuous life after falling for Nick, one of his pupils, and losing histeaching job. Nick's beautiful sister, Catherine is also there, a new postulant who will eventually become a nun. To Michael's shock, his ex-lover, now a damaged alcoholic, turns up at the retreat, hoping for comfort and healing. He decides the most moral solution is to ignore him.
The heat of summer is almost palpable in this book, with the beautiful grounds of the estate and lake (which holds an ancient submerged bell)
To an extent it is all about moral relativity and imperfect love. It's also about the difficulty of living a purely moral life. You can shut yourself away temporarily, as in the retreat, or permanently, in the nunnery, but neither are guaranteed to protect you from the difficulties of the world. It is harder for the group of lay brothers and sisters, who have many vulnerabilities and past traumas that affect them.
It is a complex novel which later on seriously questions Michael's sense of detachment, both from his own sexuality and from others, suggesting there is a selfishness in detaching yourself from the world and those in it. A lot of people in the book are objectified- Dora by her husband, Nick by Michael, and Catherine by almost everyone, although Dora make a good guess about her inner depths beneath the calm surface.
The symbol of the bell broods throughout, being linked to all kinds of change and hidden currents becoming visible, such as sexual awakening, mental health, religious feeling and guilt.
There is also a hint of women being pressured into virtue: Dora is also being pressured into a more ideal role, and though she is compared unfavourably to Catherine they are sympathetic to each other, although they do not communicate much. Their actions seem odd initially but seem entirely understandable when you understand their situations and pressures.
Michael is a misogynist and in denial about his control over his sexuality. The nuns also have idealised standards and are seen as prisoners, but actually seem to have the wisdom to live in that world. Possible the physical barrier helps too, but nobody is immune. It is empathetic about people who have trouble living both fully in the world and fully out of it.
I see Catherine as very bell-like. Her true personality is fragmented and hidden below the surface. She is mythologised by others, She is damaged, like the old bell, but also has an 'ideal' form as does the new bell.
How she appears externally is very different to how she is, as are many things in the book. I would definitely recommend it.
This book is absolutely harrowing- I found it very distressing to read- but the author does bring you into the heroine's world very effectively. It's This book is absolutely harrowing- I found it very distressing to read- but the author does bring you into the heroine's world very effectively. It's a story of the totally disposessed who undergo terrible experiences, leavened with a bit of bleak humour and some good characters, especially Precious, her friends and teacher Blue Rain.
The unremitting grimness of the heroines life does get unbearable by the end. I know the author was very keen to get an accurate picture of lives affected by racism, rape, abuse, poverty and illness but sometimes I felt Precious was only created by the author to knock down, which by the end made the authors intent more visible than the character herself....more
Started really well and lapsed into awful tedious melodrama towards the end.
This book is a strange beast, because in parts it has sections that seem pStarted really well and lapsed into awful tedious melodrama towards the end.
This book is a strange beast, because in parts it has sections that seem part of a perfectly realized whole which just got removed. It has a basic skeleton of an interesting philosophical idea; the nature of freedom and public image vs reality, plus exploring the contradictory nature of rescue.
But tacked over this like some horrid badly-cured skin is a silly lurid melodrama, with beautiful convincing physical descriptions crammed in anywhere that seems particularly important. It seems almost Murdoch got bored actually writing the novel and tried to churn something out after piling up the basic structure....more
I liked reading this. It was clearly written and, and is a possible insight into the self of one nonverbal autistic person. The reasoning 'Higashida' I liked reading this. It was clearly written and, and is a possible insight into the self of one nonverbal autistic person. The reasoning 'Higashida' gave behind his reactions to the world are really interesting and he explains them in a lucid and engaging way. The book is largely autobiographical but also includes one of his stories at the end which is an allegory/ghost story. There is a lot to learn here even though it is a small book. I think it could certainly be useful to people who don't have experience of autism.
I would caution against seeing it as representative of all autistic people; the 'we/ours' prefix to individual views was a bit misleading. Of course presuming this is written by a young child it is quite natural.
I have to say also that I wondered at times how much the process of publishing the book had altered his original words. It was writted using assisted communication, which is not universally accepted as credible (a lot of the interpretation is done by the assistant).
In places the tone read a bit more like a neurotypical parent explaining their son to other people, especially in the section that romanticised autistic people as primordial- at the same time it seemed to encourage parents to feel there was a 'normal', ordinary boy somehow hiding in the uncommunicative form of every autistic boy! This seemed to me a bit odd and perhaps unhelpful, although I know the intent was to promote empathy which is of course a good thing.
But it is one thing which made me wonder if it was written by someone else. Again all my autistic friends describe their experiences in more concrete terms, and don't innately 'know' what neurotypical people feel or think as Higashi does.
I have never met any autistic person who describe themself as 'trapped' in their autism as if it was some external thing they wore; they *are* autistic. It is a part of them. Those two things are very different. This is another aspect of the book which puzzled me as it implied this frequently.
That may just be the effect of translation. I was puzzled that someone totally nonverbal could write so fluidly with just a board of changing letters Some of the phrasing seemed over-romanticised in a way which didn't quite fit with the rest of the book. A lot of the autistic traits he lists are not typical of autism, and have a lot in common with 'sister' neurotypes such as ADHD.
But even if it was co-authored it had many valid points. It just seems that should be made clear. If you truly want to understand what it is like to be autistic you would probably get more insight through making friends with a variety of autistic people and asking them.
Overall I would say it is an interesting read with very good intentions to increase understanding and empathy towards autistic people....more
Loading...
