Movie Review: The Mill on the Floss

From L to R, Lucy, Maggie Tulliver, Tom Tulliver

Oh Tulliver family, how conflicted your lives are.  It hasn't been that long since I read "The Mill on the Floss" so many of the details were fresh in my mind.  When I rented the 'movie', I didn't realize that it was a BBC mini-series created prior to the year of my birth.  That said, they don't make them how they used to.  Slow movies that are true to the book are often not best sellers, especially in North America, so it was nice to see.  There were some errors that existed, but things need to be simplified to not draw the movie any longer than it's 212 minute duration.

Book: "The Mill on the Floss" by George Eliot (Mary Ann Evans)
Movie: "The Mill on the Floss" BBC
Book Publication Date: 1860
Movie Production Date: 1978
Read: July 2010
Watched: January 2011
Stars: 3.5

The characters were cast very appropriately.  The best acting came from Mr. Tulliver himself, who I found I felt the same way for him in the book as I did in the movie.  I loved him for his compassion and felt sorry for him with his inability to forgive.

Maggie Tulliver was cast twice - in the child years and then the adult years.  Same goes for Tom.  What was interesting though, is that Phillip Wakem remained the same actor throughout.  I guess humpbacks don't age or we're supposed to believe he's older due to some substantial mutton chops.  Dunno.

The movie was made like a soap opera in parts, which I laughed at for some time until I settled in and then didn't mind as much.  If you're a soap opera fan, you'll know what I mean.  I don't know what cinematography technique they use... I can only describe it as a matte finish on the film and a feeling that you're on the stage.

Maggie's aunts were as annoying as pictured in my head, with the men being just as accommodating of their intolerable wives.  Mrs. Tulliver was a good dichotomy of annoying/naive and sweet... showing some growth at the end.

The one thing that may have been a discrepancy, but I can't really recall what happened in the book.   Before the flood, Phillip Wakem came over and apologized to Maggie.  I don't know if this happened.  It wraps things up a little better, but I don't remember if the novel has this event.  Since the rest of the mini-series was pretty bang on, I assume this was the case and distrust my memory.

Has anyone else seen this movie/mini-series?  What did you think of it compared to the book?

Book Beginnings | War and Peace

So this is a little bit of 'cart before the horse', since usually I post the beginning line of the book before I begin to read it, let alone post a review of the first book (of four).  But since I have been enthralled with this work, I neglected to post the opening line.

"Well, Prince, so Genoa and Lucca are now just family estates of the Buonapartes. But I warn you, if you don't tell me that this means war, if you still try to defend the infamies and horrors perpetrated by that Antichrist—I really believe he is Antichrist—I will have nothing more to do with you and you are no longer my friend, no longer my 'faithful slave,' as you call yourself! But how do you do? I see I have frightened you—sit down and tell me all the news."

I laughed when I re-read this, because it's evident to me that this opening line would scare the crap out of people and may make some readers stop in their tracks.  That said, I really enjoy this opening line looking back.  It would be better if you had a preliminary understanding of the Napoleonic Wars before you read this, but rest assured that the rest of the book doesn't need more than a cursory history lesson which you can get in 15 minutes on wikipedia.



I really enjoy the use of dialogue in setting the scene, which I believe was a rarer device for an opening line during the time period, which typically focused on a long-run on detailed description of the setting [see Henry James' opening line next week].  I also like the ferocity of emotion and sets the reader up for a customary diplomatist reception.

Thoughts?

War & Peace | Book 1 Review

My version of War & Peace is divided into four books, and I have completed the first book in a little less than a month.  Not bad, as my assumption was that it would take me the entire year to finish this approx 1475 page behemoth.  I'm nearly 400 pages through, now and I am enjoying every second of it.

The book contains war details and what is happening on the home front including diplomatic elements, duels and practical jokes.  Someone once told me there were two types of writing - one that tells an element or a few elements of a story or topic and one which tries to explain everything over a time period.  Tolstoy has been renowned for the latter, and I must admit to being completely scared about this type of writing before starting the novel.  Now, I am completely absorbed and all I want to do is take a month off of work and read it non-stop.

I have had to do a little bit of external research on the Napoleonic Wars, and I must say that I am FASCINATED by the history.  My general impression of Napoleon was always of a little man with a lot to prove due to his stature, that won a few battles for France.  I had no idea the magnitude, and I'm really starting to appreciate his military mind.

In historical terms, book 1 deals with 1805, which is essentially the War of the Third Coalition with France on the one side, and Russia/Austria on the other.  The General at the time on the Russian side was Mikhail Kutusov (Emperor = Alexander I), which I have somehow developed an attachment to as I read.  The General became a scapegoat for a lot of the Russian losses in the battle of Austerlitz despite some of the incompetence of other Russian leaders (according to the book) in developing a game plan for the battle.  And of course, most of the Russians blamed Austria as well... and it's quite possible that the reverse is also true.

Anyway, I just loved reading about the battles in 1805 and I am incredibly impressed with Tolstoy.  I am seriously considering reading some other epic works after War & Peace, because at least in this case, the length (keep in mind I'm only 400 pages in) seems to be completely justified.  I have been reading other works in between, and I find this takes me away a little from the story.  I believe if you're going to read works concurrently, make sure you don't leave War & Peace for any extended period of time and then try to pick it back up.  Just my advice for some of the rest of you who are currently completing War & Peace challenges.

The names are a little distracting, but I have an edition that I believe simplifies this somehow without changing the text.  I'll post the translator eventually, but the book was published by 'The Folio Society', a publisher I have 99% confidence in (how can you really have 100% confidence in any publisher? :)  The main characters are often referred to (I guess this is the definition of a main character), but I still find myself forgetting whom did which during what time.  Tolstoy refers back though, and I find this helps me out a lot.

For those in my book club and in the general blogging world, WITHOUT SPOILERS, please let me know what you're thinking of the work so far.

Review: Tortilla Flat by John Steinbeck

There are some authors whom I read which I feel can do no wrong; everything I read that they have published is truly brilliant and I feel such a connection for the writing, the characters and the general feel of their works.  From an American literature standpoint, I hold two writers on a pedestal: Ernest Hemingway and John Steinbeck.

Because these are two of my favourite authors, I tend to read more of their obscure work after I have picked over some of their more well-known literature.  Sometimes I find hidden gems, and as one blogger put it, finding such a gem is like having a secret connection with a writer that only you know about.  It's special, because not very many people have experienced it.  When I read 'The Winter of Our Discontent' as well as 'Travels with Charley' by Steinbeck, I felt strongly that these were some of those works.

However, reading some of the lesser known works sometimes sets your idyllic authors up for failure.  Such was the case with 'Tortilla Flats' for me, which echo's my feelings towards another work set in Monterrey, 'Cannery Row.'

The novel is about a group of paisanos in the town 'Tortilla Flats' that are essential homeless men who steal from others within their town.  When local boy 'Danny' comes home from the war, he inherits two houses after the death of a relative and moves into one house while his friends move into the other.

The book is about the friendship of these paisanos, who find the company of each other welcome and they become a close-knit family who looks out for each other.  The generosity in these fellows is felt by many in Tortilla Flat that come upon hard times.  While not educated and generally lazy (only one friend occasionally works, with very limited exceptions), they are able to get by on minimalistic possessions and a large quantity of wine (for those that read Hemingway - the magnitude of drinking in this novel is similar).

I won't go into the plot details, but I must say that the book leaves me feeling rather ho-hum.  When reading  about Steinbeck's intent from Wikipedia, there are a few things that stand out.  Like in East of Eden when Steinbeck linked his work to the story of Cain and Abel, in Tortilla Flat Steinbeck links his plot to King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.  However, unlike in the former work, he is less implicit in his linking in 'Tortilla Flat'... and I only really found out about the allusion afterwards [Warning: Potential Plot Spoilers in upcoming quotation]:

"Steinbeck critic Joseph Fontenrose has shown how closely Tortilla flat parallels the Arthurian saga. He sees these parallels : After an obscure boyhood Arthur inherits a kingdom and is transformed from ordinary manhood to lord of the land (Danny inherits two houses); the new king has trouble with subject kings and barons who refuse to pay homage (Pilon and Pablo refuse to pay rent on Danny's second house), but are finally defeated ( the house burns down), and reconciled. Arthur (Danny) gathers knights (friends) to his Round Table and gives them lands (shelter and a place to sleep). The knights swear an oath of devotion (Danny's friends promise to see that he will never go hungry). Arthur and his knights give their attention to Pelles, the maimed King, and the Grail that he kept (the Pirate and his treasure). In fact, Fontenrose traces such parallels throughout the entire book. (Services and symbols of the Catholic Church are also keys to both the King Arthur legends and Tortilla Flat.)"

I understand the intent, but I think it missed the mark.

In addition, Steinbeck came under criticism for his portrayal of the paisanos, and I can see why.  While all the positive qualities I have mentioned above are characterized by Steinbeck, the paisanos are also sh*t disturbers and drunkards who go in and out of jail.  Here is what he writes in the foreword for the 1937 Modern Library edition:

"..it did not occur to me that paisanos were curious or quaint, dispossessed or underdoggish. They are people whom I know and like, people who merge successfully with their habitat...good people of laughter and kindness, of honest lusts and direct eyes. If I have done them harm by telling a few of their stories I am sorry. It will never happen again."

All that said, I really don't understand the point Steinbeck was looking to make.  Wikipedia talks about a phalanx, where the group of men are more than the sum of their parts.  I get it and I see where he is going, but I don't think the execution of this was present in the novel.

Steinbeck uses more wit in this work than in some of his other novels, and while I chuckled a few times, I felt that some of the jokes were forced... it was the subtle ones that really made me smile. 

Steinbeck's writing was as smooth as ever, and there are occasional glimpses into the beauty of nature and his love of the Salinas' Valley (in California), but I didn't feel the pang of adventure in my heart like I have in other works by Steinbeck.  All in all, I wouldn't recommend this book to the community unless you've read almost everything else by Steinbeck and are in need of some fluid Steinbeck prose.

I would love to hear other readers' opinions of the novel.

Book Blogger Hop

If your visiting my site from the Hop, welcome.  The question this week is:

"Why do you read the genre that you do?  What draws you to it?"

I originally began reading the classics out of worry.  I was fairly worried that I would die without having read what I felt were the most important fictional works ever written.  What I learned was, these stories and characters are interwoven into our society in subtle ways and they have an impact on our lives, whether we're readers or not. 

Now that I have been reading classics for a number of years, I have noticed I have learned a lot about writing techniques as well as history.  Because of the bookclub, I generally do additional research on books on topics that I would never have researched into otherwise.  This opens me up to a wealth and breadth of information.

I used to take pleasure when people called me 'well-read', but I think I realize now that this compliment holds very little weight with me.  My goal is to be a 'well-balanced' person, and I think reading the classics opens me up to new perspectives and enriches my everyday life.  I do not understand 'mindless' reading, because for me, reading only has value if it is mind-ful.  I am occasionally ridiculed for this perspective, and while I don't mind other reading 'mindless' work, I don't feel there is anything for ME in novels of that sort.

I also enjoy reading business books that deal with the economy and trends that occur throughout the world.  Leadership books and general 'how someone got to be rich' books do not interest me.  I also enjoy reading non-fiction, but I generally like to have a good classic on the go at the same time.  Recent non-fiction reads (Pompeii, as an example) have enriched my life, and I hope to delve further into the genre going forward.

I still worry about not finishing all the classics before I die, but I have learned to let that go by focusing on reading books I really feel guilty for not having read instead of reading books on the periphery of my interests.  This is a concept I still wrestle with.

What about you?

Review: Boom, Bust & Echo by David K. Foot

"Boom, Bust & Echo" by Daniel K Foot was a staple reference during my university courses whenever the subject of demographics arose.  As a consequence, when I found the book at a used bookstore when re-visiting my Alma mater, I had to pick it up.

Some will say there is very little value in reading a book that is 15 years old on business, because changes in the economy generally occur very quickly, especially in industries like technology.  However, I find that just like history, you can learn a lot from the past, especially with the benefit of hindsight. 

The hot topic at the time was how the baby boomer generation in North America was going to drive demand in key industries.  This book takes a look at these industries and shows us that 2/3rds of everything in business can be explained by the demographics of citizens in society.  To that end, 'Boom, Bust & Echo' explains past and future behaviour in the following chapters:

1. Boomers & other Cohorts
2. The Real Estate Meltdown
3. Demographic Investing
4. Jobs & the Corporation
5. The Rules of Retail
6. Tennis, Anyone? (Leisure Activities)
7. The Future of Cities
8. Rethinking Education
9. The Healthcare Crunch
10. What's a Family? (change in family structures)
11. An Older, Wiser Canada (boomers aging)
Appendix 1: Demographic Forecasting
Appendix 2: Product and Activity Forecasting

Since boomers have aged 15 years since this book was published, you have to remember that the spending of the boomers will change correspondingly from what is mentioned in this book.  The key point I found was that boomers don't want to feel old, more than any other generation preceding them.  To deliver products and services that make them feel young is going to be an important trend.  For example, most will not want to be put in homes, so post 2010 home healthcare should be a growing industry.  Right now, most boomers will begin retiring and will have demand for products and services reflecting their age (mainly services since boomers are wealthy and already have almost all they need).  Leisure activities shift from things like Tennis (typically a younger person sport) to bird watching and gardening. 

My generation is the Echo generation, which begins in 1980.  Since I'm at the start of this cohort, this is generally better for wealth accumulation.  Those born later in the cohort end up having to buy homes already bid up from the start of the Echo generation.  This occurred with the boomers... if you got in in the early 80's you were able to accumulate a lot of wealth in your home as the rest of the boomers drove up demand.  Limited supply saw these homes appreciate in value until the cohort peaked and boomers no longer needed houses (they already had them).  Real estate prices decrease at the apex of the curve.

The Echo generation (currently entering their 30's) will have needs for key industries such as baby products (average age that couples have children is 28), fertility and later... wealth management as mortgages and debt get paid off (usually after age 40).  Therefore, the echo generation will start saving in another ten years or so.  This should mean that companies in the wealth management industry will do well, and it will probably make sense to look hard at this industry when purchasing stock.

Some interesting things talked about, include how demographics (supply and demand) will effect subsequent generations regarding wages, unemployment and technological change.  Eventually, as the boomers get to their retirement ages... there will also be an increased demand for positions in non-for-profits as wealthy boomers look to make a difference in society.  Many will move to rural areas to wind down from years of living in suburbia or the big city.  Those who stay in the city will demand condos, for simplicity. 

This book also talked about some great ideas for changing government systems, which I can't believe have not been instated (I CAN believe it, but it makes me upset that common sense techniques are not being utilized).  One example is having two shifts of classes (say 8am-1pm, 1pm-6pm) when supply of students is greater than demand.  Why spend so much on fixed costs by building a school if no one is going to be in it for half of the day.  Why not do the same with the school year instead of starting everyone in September?  Makes sense to utilize facilities better and reduce the cost of our education system, one of the highest of developing nations.

In the healthcare industry, why are we paying doctors based on prescriptions written and test done?  This rewards those who file for unnecessary procedures.  Why not assess the health of doctor's patients and those reward those doctors that have 'less sick' patients (a system called 'capitation')?  To do this, you'd have to ensure that doctor's cannot choose patients, or they would only accept young patients (patients over 50 visit the doctor many more times than those younger) or those who don't smoke.  In the end, if you do this with all doctor's... it will roughly balance out.  The point the author makes is that, in Canada, while we have one of the best healthcare systems in the world... we pay 40% more than countries with similar services... so why wouldn't we change our system to cut costs if we could give the same levels of service?

There is also a great piece on transit (using Toronto as an example) and how to best build a transit system (pay for distance like in Europe, and not on a one-fee per ride basis).  The one-fee per ride system has people living in the downtown core paying for people on the outskirts of the city... which is unfair.  If we eliminated this, then transit could pay for itself instead of it being heavily subsidized.  There would be less urban sprawl as a result of this, as people would prefer to live downtown.  Since the transit company would be making money, the subway could grow within the downtown core and pay for itself.

This book is chalk full of great suggestions on how to invest, how to make current systems more efficient and how to best ensure that you make better decisions by taking into consideration demographics.  I can see why this work is quoted so often in business courses, and I would recommend that anyone looking for information on the topics listed above, give this book a read.  While demographics in North America in isolation are becoming less important from an investment point of view in today's globalized world, demographic tools can be applied to many countries to understand what is going on politically and economically in those countries as well.

Other notes:

• Unemployment and poverty are prime causes of poor health, so to reduce healthcare costs a city needs to tackle these issues.
• 1 in 3 households will have babies before marriage in Canada.  Demographics also predict when traditional families (one spouse at home) will exist.
• Demographics show when young people will 'cocoon' (stay home) instead of going out to bars
• Young people eat substantially more than older people, so there is a greater demand for food when there are more young people in a country
• 2012-2031 is the 'era of grey power' when the baby boomers hit retirement age (65)

War & Peace Challenge

There are a few read-a-longs of 'War & Peace' occuring in the book blogging community in 2011.  It turns out that it's a perfect one year challenge:  If you read one chapter a day, apparently, you will be done at the end of the year.  So I thought that during these challenges that I read so much about, why not begin a similar challenge with my non-virtual world book club (jokingly referred to as 'book club in real life')?

I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to keep up with this, and I definitely won't be starting until the end of the month because I have two books on the go in addition to two magazines (TIME, National Geographic) which I'd like to finish.  Work will probably be really busy this month as well, so we'll see when I can get around to it.  Anyways, there will probably be prizes which I think will make it fun.  I'm toying with an idea where everyone brings in a 're-gifted book' and winners get to choose from a pile of books in some sort of order.  I've been thinking of creating some interesting awards like:

"Fastest Procratinator" [for those that leave most of the reading until the last month] or
"Skimmer Extroardinare" [someone who doesn't really 'READ' the book, but just skims through it]

...or whatever.  Would love to hear some suggestions on awards and please leave a comment if you're also planning on reading 'War & Peace' this year, whether part of a challenge or otherwise.