Review: A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens

Let me start off this review by admitting that this is the only Dickens work I have read, outside of "A Christmas Carol."  To be perfectly honest, the reason I have yet to delve into his works is because I had very poor expectations of his work by others that have read his well-known material and detested it.  In addition, Dickens has been voted down in my book club for over three years running.  I finally decided to just plunge into his work, and I begun with "A Tale of Two Cities" because a close friend of mine told me that I would enjoy it.  She was right.

Here's the synopsis of the book, which I'm shamelessly stealing from Wikipedia because it's just so compact an encompassing:

"A Tale of Two Cities (1859) is a novel by Charles Dickens, set in London and Paris before and during the French Revolution. With well over 200 million copies sold, it is among the most famous works of fiction.


The novel depicts the plight of the French peasantry demoralized by the French aristocracy in the years leading up to the revolution, the corresponding brutality demonstrated by the revolutionaries toward the former aristocrats in the early years of the revolution, and many unflattering social parallels with life in London during the same time period. It follows the lives of several protagonists through these events. The most notable are Charles Darnay and Sydney Carton. Darnay is a French once-aristocrat who falls victim to the indiscriminate wrath of the revolution despite his virtuous nature, and Carton is a dissipated British barrister who endeavours to redeem his ill-spent life out of his unrequited love for Darnay's wife, Lucie Manette."

There were a few things that I was expecting from having talked to others about Dickens.  Since he grew up in a poor family and hated social inequities, I knew there was going to be some sort of struggle between classes, which their obviously was.  I have been told that a majority of his work is set in England, which seems logical given that he was born and died there.

What I did not expect, was that Dickens is a satirist.  Being critical of class structures sometimes leads itself into being a satirist, but that doesn't necessarily translate 100% of the time.  I was pleasantly surprised at how subtly humorous Dickens was.  I'm sure there were plenty of things that went over my head, but I laughed out loud a few times at some zingers which resonated with me.

I was also not expecting the novel to be such a mystery, and here I have to tip my hat to Dickens.  Not only did he write a mystery, but he used no shameless Dan Brown mystery techniques... and it doesn't come across as an English Agatha Christie type mystery.  It's obviously LITERATURE and not intended to be in the MYSTERY genre, but Dickens displayed many scenes without giving background into what was happening.  Either this is done because a writer is poor at his/her craft, or because he/she wants to surprise you with something.  The air of mystery surrounding these scenes was so refreshing... it seemed to combine my love of the genre as a child with my love of literature as an adult.  I had no idea the two could be put together so seamlessly.  Here is what I jotted down as I was reading: "Has a way with making things mysterious, but still has a literary air."

The other thing that appealed to me is that Dickens is dramatic.  I think I should capitalize the word to give it more emphasis.  Dickens = Drama!  I can see where some would be put off by this, but I loved it.  It wasn't subtle like the humour in the novel, but it was really compelling to me... quite possibly because I am a dramatic person.  My spouse can be a drama queen, so perhaps I just have an affinity towards it. 
I did find that Dickens had the tendency to go off on tangents.  When he was describing the history of Monseigneur, his house, his servants, his frivolous lifestyle, etc... basically the definition of a corrupt aristocrat, I tuned out a little.  I appreciated a little background, but not necessarily a whole chapter on it.  I could see where readers could get put-off of Dickens, but I didn't find too many occasions of this in the novel.  He had a tendency to jump around to various other characters in the story, but all jumping seemed to be properly placed in keeping with the story.

So that's my view on Dickens, based on this one experience.  Let me talk a little bit about the novel.

"A Tale of Two Cities" was rooted in real-life events, and I only found this out after searching "Bastille" on the Internet to find out exactly what Dickens had detailed the fall of the Bastille (a fortress-prison) in Paris in 1789. 

The title of the book was obviously about the different natures of both London and Paris at the time .  So the two cities were represented by peace (London) and turmoil (Paris) and chronicled the class disparity between the aristocrats and the peasants... which could be seen as two distinct cities as to themselves.  The city where the aristocrats lived, a beautiful Paris where money was not a concern and indulgence was normal to a Paris as viewed by the peasants, where people starved daily and their government leaders had abandoned them.  The dualism in the book was poignant, and Dickens' opening lines stress the power of perspective, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times" and then went on to say that the novel spoke of a period that "was so far like the present period".  Every society has had it's rich and it's poor, and the viewpoints of both classes can be remarkably different.

I liked the theme of man (in this case, Charles Darnay) running away from a difficult situation and ignoring his responsibilities to lead a quiet life with the woman he loved.  Was the man a coward or was he sensible?  Did he due greater harm to the people of Paris and if so, was he justified in doing harm?  Do some people have a duty in life that they must face or do we all have a duty to live the life we WANT to lead? 

Due to the way Sydney Carton ended his life, does this make him a hero?  Is it more noble to abuse yourself for years in a self-deprecating nature to eventually self-deprecate for a purpose?  Is this what heroes are?  Was Carton a hero or was he just finding the easy, noble way to peace of mind?  Hard to tell.

This work is full of questions and Dickens does not attempt to answer them.  I enjoy the fact that he left these decisions up to the reader.  I enjoyed every minute of this book, minus the one diatribe about Monseigneur.  I am a current fan of Dickens, and I plan on giving some of his other work a go.  I'm still intimidated by the length of some of the novels, so I'll probably continue with a shorter work like "Oliver Twist" or "Great Expectations."  Thoughts on this in the book blogging community?

The Curse of Lono | Hunter S. Thompson

Most people either really enjoy Hunter S. Thompson or think everything that he stands for is a complete showmanship scam.  Those that enjoyed his work "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" will enjoy yet another great work of "Gonzo Journalism".  While "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" was labeled as a work of fiction, this novel seems to be classified by some (at least on Wikipedia) as non-fiction.  It's another book where the lines between reality and fiction are blurred... typical of Gonzo style.

The book is about Hunter S. Thompson being commissioned to follow the 1980 Honolulu Marathon for a magazine called "Running."  He meets his friend Ralph Steadman there, who flies to Hawaii with his family [Note: Steadman is the famous English artist that is responsible for most of the illustrations in Thompson's work, including the illustrated copy of "The Curse of Lono"].  Before he arrives in Hawaii, he meets an obscure character on the plane and we're introduced to him right away with yet another great opening line to a novel by Thompson:

"We were about forty minutes out of San Francisco when the crew finally decided to take action on the problem in Lavatory 1B."

If that doesn't get you interested, then nothing will.  It's indicative of the type of beginning that we saw in Fear and Loathing:

"We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold. I remember saying something like 'I feel a bit lightheaded; maybe you should drive . . .' And suddenly there was a terrible roar all around us and the sky was full of what looked like huge bats, all swooping and screeching and diving around the car, which was going about a hundred miles an hour with the top down to Las Vegas. And a voice was screaming, 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'"

But I digress.  After the marathon is 'covered', the story evolves (or devolves depending on your point of view) into a curious story about Thompson's time in Hawaii.  Throughout the work, there are snippets about Captain James Cook who was said to be the reincarnation of a Polynesian God named Lono.  As the story of Thompson plays out, snippets from a historical text are inserted throughout the story.  You're not quite sure why until the ending, when Thompson states that he is the next reincarnation of the God Lono. 

As expected, the work is full of Thompson humour and drug induced visions.  It also contains letters from Thompson to Steadman (in Gonzo style - we're not sure if these are true or not) which help the story along.  All in all, this work is a must have for Thompson enthusiasts.  It's a bit hard to find [since it's out of print], especially the beautifully illustrated Taschen 2005 over sized version, but if you can get your hands on one you should do so.  I was offered $200 for mine and could not part with it after reading it, because the novel and illustrations were such a work of art.

The Folio Society has put out a nice version of Cook's travels, and I wouldn't mind getting my hands on one after reading this work.  His story is interesting in itself, and the historical account of his death from the hands of natives was fascinating, though gruesome.

Ravelstein | Saul Bellow

The last book I read by Saul Bellow, entitled "Henderson, the Rain King", I remember being a truly inspiring work.  The song by "Counting Crows" entitled "Rain King" was based on the novel, which is what led me to the grace of Saul Bellow's literature.  As such, the two men (the other being Adam Duritz of the Counting Crows) are invariably linked in my mind... and the other day, I rediscovered my favourite band from my youth and as such, I had a yearning to read some Bellow.  I picked up "Henderson, the Rain King to give it another go (in my age, I find myself forgetting most of the plot), but then decided to try something new and consequently opened my only other Bellow work entitled "Ravelstein" which he wrote in 2000 after his professor, Allan Bloom.  The work is listed as fiction, but I would wager that most of the work is non-fiction (biography style); the novel is purposely set-up in a fashion for the reader to question the split, if any.

This novel did not live up to my feelings on "Henderson, the Rain King", though such a feat would be difficult to achieve.  I find that the last work of an author before his death (Bellow died in 2005) usually isn't his/her best work, with the latest exception I have coming in the form of Hardy's "Jude the Obscure."  I digress.

Ravelstein was a book about "Abe Ravelstein" written after his death from HIV by the author "Chick", Ravelstein's teacher and close friend.  After Ravelstein dies, Chick puts off writing the book about Ravelstein and nearly doesn't complete the work... for he has his own bout of health problems.  Are the powers that be keeping Chick alive to fulfill his promise to Ravelstein to write his biography or is Chick avoiding writing the work to give himself something to live for?  Ultimately, the death of Ravelstein forces Chick to come to grips with his own mortality... and this is the underlying theme of the novel.

Ravelstein lives an excessive life - he drinks, smokes, purchases the best things money can buy and is a bit of a snob.  However, he is tremendously loved by his students... and others either love him or hate him... there is very little moderation, paralelling the man's life.  Ravelstein doesn't sugar coat things - he gives his opinions to and of his friends straight-up.  Some of them appreciate the honesty, and some would rather he kept his thoughts to himself.  The point is, Ravelstein is a brash, excessive man, and as the reader learns about his life... he/she has to determine if he/she loves or hates the man... with the typical ups and downs you would experience from an honest telling of a man's life.

By intertwining his own life with that of Ravelstein's, Bellow (assuming the narrator Chick is the author) is able to write an aytpical biography which deals with Chick's morality struggle as opposed to Ravelstein's life in isolation.  This makes the work much more enjoyable, and a unique telling of the man's life which I think Bloom (Ravelstein) would have appreciated.  Ravelstein is described through the nuances of his speech and actions, and not the 'events' of his life... adding a nice literary flair.

The book was an enjoyable one, though a bit high brow at times.  While I believe the biography was a good one, I didn't feel blown away by this Bellow work.  It's honesty was refreshing, but it missed a deep connection with me... something that I was hoping Bellow could replicate from "Henderson, The Rain King."

============
QUOTATIONS
============
"A tragic hero has to be above the average in height." 30

"In the old days there was still a considerable literary community in our country, and medicine and law were still 'the learned professions,' but in an American city today you can no longer count on doctors, lawyers, businessmen, journalists, politicians, television personalities, architects, or commodities traders to discuss Stendhal's novels or Thomas Hardy's poems." 46

"A summary of his argument was that while you could get an excellent technical training in the U.S., liberal education had shrunk to the vanishing point.  We were in thrall to the high tech, which had transformed the modern world.  The older generation saved towards the education of it's children.  The cost of a B.A. had risen to $150,000.  Parents might as well flush these dollars down the toilet, Ravelstein believed.  No real education was possible in American universities except for aeronautical engineers, computerists, and the like.  The universities were excellent in biology and the physical sciences, but the liberal arts were a failure." 47

"Associate with the noblest people you can find; read the best books; live with the mighty; but learn to be happy alone." 161

"German militarism produced the extremest and most horrible nihilism.  For the rank-and-file this led to the bloodiest and craziest kind of revanchist murderous zeal.  Because it was implicit in carrying out orders that all responsibility  went back to the top, the source of all orders.  And everybody was thus absolved." 168

"If only we could bring back the full days we knew as kids.  But we became too familiar with the data of experience, I suggest.  Our way of organizing the data which rush by in gestalt sytle - this is, in increasingly abstract forms - speeds up experiences into a dangerous topsy-turvy fast-forward comedy.  Our need for rapid disposal eliminates the details that bewitch, hold, or delay the children.  Are is one rescue from this chaotic acceleration.  Meter in poetry, tempo in music, form and color in painting.  But we do feel that we are speeding earthward, crashing into our gaves.  'If these were just words,' I said to Rosamund.  'But I feel it every day.  Powerless thinking itself eats up what is left of life...'" 192

"Men were freshly killed and be-headed.  The heads were set aside.  The researcher who recorded all this said they were a currency used in wife-purchase.  That's why headhunters hunt heads." 193

A Man Without a Country | Kurt Vonnegut Jr

Let me preface this by saying that I have only read two works by Vonnegut, but both have put me in the classification as a fan. “Slaughterhouse Five”, on the bombing of Dresden, was a good book... but I can’t say that it has stuck with me very much over time. The opposite is true of one of his lesser known works entitled “The Galapagos”, which is a satire on human evolution. Vonnegut’s prognosis on the human race is that we’re failing due to one particular genetic defect: the fact that we have huge brains. His argument in the book is that, for humans to evolve as a species, we need to evolve to have smaller brains. I find this hilarious, truthful and fascinating all at the same time.


The other thing about Vonnegut that resonates with me, is that we ended up working for the same company [we’re both Scorpio’s as well] at one point in our respective careers. Vonnegut’s father grew up working in the arts and strongly advocated Kurt getting a degree that was a little more substantial. At one point he worked in public relations for one of the largest corporate conglomerates in the world... and I laugh at how horrible the fit probably was. I see that as a great work of satire in and of itself.

This brief interlude gives you an idea on where my headspace is coming from as I review this work, “A Man Without a Country”. The novel was published in 2005 when Vonnegut was 82 years old, and is a “collection of articles written over the last 5 years” since his previous published work, “God Bless You, Dr. Kevorkian,” published in 1999. Less than two years after “A Man Without a Country” was published, Vonnegut (God Bless him – ‘a joke, since Vonnegut was deeply Unreligious) passed at the ripe age of 84. So it goes.

Now that we have all that background stuff out of the way, let’s talk about the book. “A Man Without a Country” is filled with a bunch of world musings by Vonnegut. Most are the standard “humans killing the planet,” “the United States is hated by all with good reason”, “Politicians are idiots and the system breeds them that way,” etc. All this stuff resonates, and Vonnegut provides us with some great humour... but it’s the same shtick we’ve heard from everyone that has any intelligence whatsoever. However, there are little gems in here that maybe aren’t as common... such as a nice little portrayal of why Vonnegut wouldn’t order envelopes sent to his house (for his manuscripts), but would rather walk to the store and interact with people and the world in general. It’s true that lots of us have lost this – we lose a lot of valuable life by absorbing ourselves in virtual worlds. And as Vonnegut said, we’re supposed to be dancing animals.

The one thing that stands out to me in the old age of Vonnegut, is that he’s given up. He declares that we’re already doomed and there is nothing we can do about it anymore. This may be true... but you don’t start revolutions by telling people they will fail. We probably will, but Gandhi didn’t tell Indians that they should just give up their salt and play by the rules. My intention is not to compare Gandhi to Vonnegut by any means, but I would think that someone on the edge of his life would be more concerned with making a difference than telling people things are hopeless.

That being said, I enjoyed the book for what it was – it had some good satirical points by commenting on what we’ve done to society and the world, but it didn’t suggest ways to improve things or introduce any new concepts. For Vonnegut, I found this book to be a bit “tired”, and that left some sort of negative undertone on the book for me as a whole. That being said, I’m glad I read it and there are things about it that I hope will stick with me as I go about my life until my own... “so it goes”.

Point Counter Point | Aldous Huxley

Reading Aldous Huxley’s “Point Counter Point” was like walking 5km through three foot snow drifts. The process is a complete struggle, you sweat, you curse and both your mind and body are exhausted by the effort... but in the end, you look at what you struggled through and think... “I’m glad I accomplished this, but I wouldn’t do it again.”

“Point Counter Point” was about the British aristocracy and detailed some of their musings about life, society and the people and structures within it. Unfortunately, the meandering through these opinions and elitist dialogue seemed random and disjointed. Huxley took us from one set of characters to another and from one thought or topic to another, with little to link everything together. Huxley ran the gambit from musings on science, ecology, sexuality, morality, politics, art and religion.

The characters within the novel proved to be unsympathetic and non-relatable, creating the inevitable slog through difficult terrain. That said, the point of the novel was to compare all these people to Mark and Mary Rampion, the implied protagonist couple. Not only was this one of the only couples not experiencing infidelity, but their outlook on life was a beacon for embracing one’s humanity.

Huxley’s message is to live life based on what comes naturally to you. Do not be concerned with trying to be too moral, because humanity in itself is not completely moral. Having material wealth and aspiring for financial gain is an artificial construct created by society and entirely irrelevant to life. Being human has more to do with emotions and physical needs – something that man has tried to stymie over the years because we feel it’s detestable. Huxley challenges that while some sexual acts are perverted, ones completed in the pure act of love are not.

In the end, the message is to live life like a man on a tight rope. Despite this being one of the most difficult challenges of life, it’s the balance that is most critical to being the best human you can be. The key is balancing yourself is being completely honest about your humanity in an effort to get back to the things that make us humans in the first place.

English landscapes and nature in general were not detailed throughout the novel, nor were many character descriptions presented. This novel was all about the thoughts and actions of the characters in an effort to show the reader how much we’ve neglected our own humanity by pursuing a life without a focus on balance.

============
QUOTATIONS
============

"Most habitual debauchees are debauchees not because they enjoy debauchery, but because they are uncomfortable when deprived of it.  Habit converts luxurious enjoyments into dull and daily necessities.  The man who has formed a habit of women or gin, of opium-smoking or glagellation, finds it as difficult to live without his vice as to live without bread and water, even though the actual practice of the vice may have become in itself as unexciting as eating a crust or drinking a glass from the kitchen tap." 221

"Everything's incredible, if you can skin off the crust of obviousness our habits put on it.  Every object and event contains within itself an infinity of depths within depths." 297

...
" 'When humanity's destroyed, obviously they'll be no more problem.  But it seems a poor sort of solution.  I believe there may be another, even within the framework of the present system.  A temporary one while the system's being modified in the direction of a permanent solution.  The root of the evil's in the individual psychology; so it's there, in the individual psychology, that you'd have to begin.  The first step would be to make people live dualistically, in two compartments.  In come compartment as industrialized workers, in the other as human beings.  As idiots and machines for eight hours out of every twenty-four and real human beings for the rest.'

'Don't they do that already?'

'Of course they don't.  They live as idiots and machines all the time, at work and in their leisure.  Like idiots and machines, but imagining they're living like civilized humans, even like gods.  The first thing to do is to make them admit that they are idiots and machines during working hours.  'Our civilization being what it is, this is what you'll have to say to them, 'you've got to spend eight hours out of every twenty-four as a mixture between an imbecile and a sewing machine.  It's very disagreeable, I know.  It's humiliating and disgusting.  but there you are.  You've got to do it; otherwise the whole fabric of our world will fall to bits and we'll all starve.  Do the job, then, idiotically and mechanically; and spend your leisure hours in being a real complete man or woman, as the case may be.  Don't mix the two lives together; keep the bulkheads watertight between them.  The genuine human life in your leisure hours in the real thing.  The other's just a dirty job that's got to be done.  And never forget that it is dirty and, except in so far as it keeps you fed and society intact, utterly unimportant, utterly irrelevant to the real human life.  Don't be deceived by the canting rogues who talk of the sanctity of labour and the Christian Service that business men do their fellows.  It's all lies.  You work's just a nasty, dirty job, made unfortunately necessary by the folly of your ancestors.  They piled up a mountain of garbage and you've got to go on digging it away, for fear it might stink you to death, dig for dear life, while cursing the memory of the maniacs who made all the dirty work for you to do.  but don't try to cheer yourself up by pretending the nasty mechanical job is a noble one.  It isn't; and the only result of saying and believing that it is, will be to lower your humanity to the level of the dirty work.  If you believe in business as Service and the sanctity of labour, you'll merely turn yourself into a mechanical idiot for twenty-four hours out of the twenty-four.  Admit it's dirty, hold your nose and do it for eight hours and then concentrate on being a real human being in your leisure.  A real complete human being .  Not a newspaper reader, not a jazzer, not a radio fan.  The industrialists who purvey standardized ready-made amusements to the masses are doing their best to make you as much of a mechanical imbecile in your leisure as in your hours of work.  But don't let them.  Make the effort of being human.' That's what you've got to say to people; that's the lesson you've got to teach the young.  You've got to persuade everybody that all this grand industrial civilization is just a bad smell and that the real, significant life can only be lived apart from it.  It'll be a very long time before decent living and industrialized smell can be reconciled.  Perhaps, indeed, they're irreconcilable.  It remains to be seen.  In the meantime, at any rate, we must shovel the garbage and bear the smell stoically, and in the intervals try to lead the real human life.' " 304-306
...
" 'You've got the wrong sort of pride,' she had told him. 'You're not ashamed of being a dunce and not knowing things.  But you are ashamed of making mistakes.  You'd rather not do a thing at all than do it badly.  That's quite wrong.' " 311

"He complained to me that both his children have a passion for machinery - motor cars, trains, aeroplanes, radios.  'It's an infection, like smallpox.  The love of death's in the air.  They breathe it and get infected.  I try to persuade them to like something else.  But they won't have it.  Machinery's the only thing for them.  They're infected with the love of death.  It's as though the young were absolutely determined to bring the world to an end - mechanize it first into madness, then into sheer murder.  Well, let them if they want to, the stupid little devils! But it's humiliating, it's horribly humiliating that human beings should have made such a devilish mess of things.  Life could have been so beautiful, if they'd cared to make it so.  Yes, and it was beautiful once, I believe.  Now it's just an insanity; it's just death violently galvanized, twitching about and making a hellish hullabaloo to persuade itself that it isn't really death, but the most exuberant sort of life.  Think of New York, for example; think of Berlin!  God!  Well, let them go to hell if they want to.  I don't care.' " 320

"They take the main intellectualist axiom for granted - that there's an intrinsic superiority in mental, conscious, voluntary life over physical, intuitive, instinctive, emotional life.  The whole of the modern civilization is based on the idea that the specialized function which gives a man his place in society is more important than the whole man, or rather is the whole man, all the rest being irrelevant or even (since the physical, intuitive, instinctive, and emotional part of man doesn't contribute appreciably to making money or getting on in an industrialized world) positively harmful and detestable.  The low-brow of our modern industrialized society has all the defects of the intellectual and none of his redeeming qualities." 322-323

" 'That's the enormous stupidity of the young people of this generation,' Mrs Quarles went on; 'they never think of life except in terms of happiness.  How shall I have a good time?  That's the question they ask.  Or they complain.  Why am I not having a better time?  But this is a world where good times, in their sense of the word, perhaps in any sense, simply cannot be had continuously, and by everybody.  And even when they get their good times, it's inevitably a disappointment - for imagination is always brighter than reality.  And after it's been had for a little, it becomes a bore.  Everybody strains after happiness, and the result is that nobody's happy.  It's because they're on the wrong road." 352-353

"A business man is just a man of science who happens to be rather stupider than the real man of science." 402

"The only truth that can be of any interest to us, or that we can know, is a human truth.  And to discover that, you must look for it with the whole being, not with a specialized part of it." 402

"This non-human truth that the scientists are trying to get at with their intellects - it's utterly irrelevant to ordinary human living.  Our truth, the relevant human truth is something you discover by living - living completely, with the whole man.  The results of your amusements, Philip, all these famous theories about the cosmos and their practical applications - they've got nothing whatever to do with the only truth that matters.  And the non-human truth isn't merely irrelevant; it's dangerous.  It distracts people's attention from the important human truth.  It makes them falsify their experience in order that lived reality may fit in with abstract theory." 402-403

The Ordinary Man:
"He can afford to have wings too, so long as he also remembers that he's got feet.  It's when people strain themselves to fly all the time that they go wrong.  They're ambitious of being angels; but all they succeed in being is either cuckoos and geese on the one hand or else disgusting vultures and carrion crows on the other." 405

"It's a damned sight better to behave like a beast - a real genuine undomesticated animal, I mean - than to invent a devil and then behave like one's invention." 405

"It's got about as much to do with us as the fact of this table being made of electrons, or an infinite series of waves undulating in an unknown medium, or a large number of point-events in a four-dimensional continuum, or whatever else Philip's scientific friends assure us it is made of.  As much as that.  That is to say, practically nothing.  Your absolute God and absolute devil belong to the class of irrelevant non-human facts.  The only things that concern us are the little relative gods and devils of history and geography, the little relative goods and evils of individual casuistry.  Everything else is non-human and beside the point; if you allow yourself to be influenced by non-human, absolute considerations, then you inevitably make either a fool of yourself, or a villain, or perhaps both." 406

"Nobody's asking you to be anything but a man.  A man, mind you.  Not an angel or a devil.  A man's a creature on a tight-rope, walking delicately, equilibrated, with mind and consciousness and spirit at one end of his balancing pole and body and instinct and all that's unconscious and earthly and mysterious on the other.  Balanced.  Which is damnably difficult.  And the only absolute he can ever really know is the absolute of perfect balance.  The absoluteness of perfect relativity.  Which is a paradox and nonsense intellectually.  But so is all real, genuine, living truth - just nonsense according to logic.  And logic is just nonsense in the light of living truth.  You can choose which you like, logic or life.  It's a matter of taste.  Some people prefer being dead." 406

"Leave the instincts to themselves and they'll do very little mischief.  If men made love only when they were carried away by passion, if they fought only when they were angry or terrified, if they grabbed at property only when they had need or were swept off their feet by an uncontrollable desire for possession - why, I assure you, this world would be a great deal more like the Kingdom of Heaven than it is under our present Christian-intellectual-scientific dispensation." 407

"Telling them to obey Jesus is telling them to be more than human.  And, in practice, trying to be more than human always means succeeding in being less than human.  Telling men to obey Jesus literally is telling them, indirectly, to behave like idiots and finally like devils." 408

"That's the trouble: when you're up against non-human things and people, you invariably become non-human yourself." 409

"The world's full of ridiculous God-snobs.  People who aren't really alive, who've never done any vital act, who aren't in any living relation with anything; people who haven't the slightest personal or practical knowledge of what God is.  But they moo away in churches, they coo over their prayers, they pervert and destroy their whole dismal existences by acting in accordance with the will of a arbitrarily imagined abstraction which they choose to call God." 426

I, Robot | Isaac Asimov

There is no doubt that Isaac Asimov was one of the best and most innovative Science Fiction writers of all-time.  My passion for his "Foundation" series cannot be equalled for anything else in the genre.  However, "I, Robot" fell a little short based on prior Asimov expectations.

Know first that the book is a collection of short stories written in different periods and tied together through discussions between "robo-psychologist" Susan Calvin, and a reporter.  The connection between the stories makes logical sense, but doesn't flow like a REAL novel would.  While the Asimov skill for storytelling doesn't really come through in these works, his knowledge and innovation on robotics theory does.

These stories, written in 1950, begin with Asimov's three laws of robotics:

1) A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.


2) A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
 
The stories go on to show some of the problems that arise out of robot interpretation of these laws.  The typical plot structure is as follows:
 
A) A more advanced type of robot is created
B) A human order is given to said robot
C) Robot interprets order in a different way than the human order was intended
D) This creates some sort of problem for humanity
E) Humans try to figure out what's wrong by means of trial and error mixed with ingenuity
 
While this becomes somewhat formulaic in most stories, others are more enlightening.
 
"Robbie" is a tale of robot emotions, and the power of love - especially of children.
"Reason" shows us that creating something "more intelligent" then ourselves could lead to disastrous results.  In addition, there is a great theme explored on the power of blind faith - hinted to be religion (God = "Master)
"Evidence" tells the story of a political figure that may or may not be a robot and asks "Who cares?  As long as they do a good job!"
"The Evitable Conflict" flashes forward to a time where we are run by "machines."  There is a great point on whether human thinking becomes obsolete or if machines make human thought even more valued. 
 
All the tales in general touch on the inefficiency of humans, but yet point out how much strength and versatility we have in our minds (if not our bodies).
 
The one thing that I found excruciatingly, was the use of bad futuristic slang such as "we've been stuck with pretty lousy jobs in our time, but this takes the iridium asteroid" 69, or "holy howling Jupiter" 74, "Jumping Space!" 82, "Jumping Jupiter!" 88, "Great Galaxy" 156.  I found this in bad taste, but maybe it's indicative around the humour of the time or maybe I just need to lighten up - as bad slang is present in all recent human history.
 
On the whole, while the book lacked a cohesive story, it did provide some enlightenment on the human condition and presented a believable history of robots.  Each story provided an additional step of the evolution but really lacked man's reaction [other than specialists] to the times.  In addition, the novel assumed that each time humans were able to correct the situation.  Over the course of history, it's been shown that some of the things man does to nature cannot be corrected by man at all - look at the poisonous cane frog that was introduced in Australia to kill aphids (or some other creature) who were destroying the crops.  Now the cane frogs are taking over.  I would assume that it's more likely that the robots take over and control humans and we get the same dilemma as in "Frankenstein."  Is the monster the product or the creator?
 
QUOTATION:
"Our entire technical civilization has created more unhappiness and misery than it has removed.  Perhaps an agrarian or pastoral civilization, with less culture and less people would be better.  If so, the Machines must move in that direction, preferably without telling us, since in our ignorant prejudices we only know that what we are used to, is good - and we would then fight change.  Or perhaps a complete urbanization, or a complete caste-ridden society, or complete anarchy, is the answer.  We don't know.  Only the Machines know, and they are going there and taking us with them.
 
'But you are telling me, Susan, that the 'Society for Humanity' is right; and that Mankind has lost its own say in its future.'
 
'It never had any, really.  It was always at the mercy of economic and sociological forces it did not understand - at the whims of climate, and the fortunes of war.  Now the Machines understand them; and no one can stop them, since the Machines will deal with them as they are dealing with the Society, - having, as they do, the greatest of weapons at their disposal, the absolute control of our economy.'
 
'How horrible!'
 
'Perhaps how wonderful!  Think, that for all time, all conflicts are finally inevitable.  Only the Machines, from now on, are inevitable!' " 223-224

A Disobedient Girl | Ru Freeman

“A Disobedient Girl” chronicles two women’s struggle for well-being in their native Sri Lanka. Latha is a young, orphan servant girl to the Vithanages, a higher caste family with one daughter, Thara, of approximately Latha’s own age. They grow up as friends, but are not oblivious to the caste differences among them. When Latha is refused money from Mrs. Vithanage for shoes, she strikes back against the family – creating a downward spiral that consumes all parties for decades.

Biso is a middle-aged woman who escapes the abuse of her alcoholic husband by taking her three children on a train ride to their Aunt’s house, where they hope to find some sort of comfort and semblance of normality. She meets many people on the train ride and soon realizes that she will not have a simple journey.

This beginning of Latha’s story seemed akin to The Kite Runner. Two children grow up together with a caste difference, under the backdrop of a country in turmoil. Both authors have a background in their respective countries (Hosseini in Afghanistan and Freeman in Sri Lanka). As “A Disobedient Girl” unfolds, you really get a sense for some of the elements missing from the novel.

While Hosseini was vivid in his portrayal of a country in turmoil, Freeman barely scratched the surface. One reviewer I read stated this perfectly when she said the “country (was) clearly outlined but not well coloured-in.” I couldn’t agree more with this assessment. I learned absolutely nothing about the culture and history of Sri Lanka, which is what I picked up the book for originally. For a Sri Lankan journalist with years of covering the country, I was upset that such potential for information was omitted.

While Hosseini created a world where I felt the struggle and longing of his characters, I felt little passion for Freeman’s protagonists. This had little to do with the plot, which made me WANT to feel for the struggles of both Latha and Biso, as well as some of the more minor characters. I just felt that the story lacked passion, despite the yearning for new lives. The struggle was stated but it was not felt, and I found this disheartening.

The novel lacked conciseness and only towards the end of the novel did I feel compelled to pick up my own pace to find out what happens. The reader knows the stories will eventually come together, and while obvious, the drama in the ending made the reader want to reach a conclusion. I could see this being a novel where people would give up half way through, but it’s worth a read until the end.

I have no literary background, but there was a gaping hole left in the story of Biso by the not delving into a key theme. There was a passing comment in Sri Lanka about how impossible it is to discover the truth – that Sri Lankans will muddy stories to suit their own purposes. Freeman gives the feeling that this quest for truth will be explored, but it never really is. This could have redeemed the novel slightly and also opened a window to the events of the time.

Freeman’s writing style was simplistic, but I didn’t find myself wanting a pad of paper to write down quotes (something I usually do). Freeman was a decent storyteller, but she had no insight - no theories on how the world works that we could take with us at the end of the day to create a timeless story, remembered by readers.

Overall, I was disappointed in the work as a whole. The plot was a good one, but the writing didn’t do the story the justice. It was an ambitious attempt by Freeman that fell short.

===========
QUOTATION
===========

"Maybe that was how it was with women, she thought, whatever their status; eventually their men would be found unworthy." 92-93

Disgrace | J.M. Coetzee

J.M. Coetzee's novel "Disgrace" was awarded the Booker Prize in 1999. Having enjoyed some previous Booker winners (ie: Life of Pi), I decided to give it a shot this weekend.

The novel is about David Lurie, a middle aged professor, who falls under the spell of one of his female students. He has an affair with her and inevitably, things turn sour and he is brought into a hearing to plead his case to the university. He refuses to admit sympathy or remorse for his actions, but he is quite willing to concede that he is guilty.

Now jobless, he decides to visit his daughter, Lucy, in a rural area of South Africa. He only somewhat understands the choices she has made in becoming a 'peasant', working for a living by boarding dogs and selling produce, but finds joy in the quiet life... until their world is turned upside down.

This novel explores the black verses white conflict in South Africa, in addition to challenging the boundaries and definitions of relationships. The themes are tough ones, which not everyone will enjoy. But sometimes literature can explore tough themes, and still amaze us. Somehow there can still be beauty contained in the meaning and in the lives of the characters. However, Coetzee falls so short of this mark that I cannot see why anyone would recommend this book, let alone how a novel such as this could win the Booker Prize.

There is a confusing parallel of an opera, being written by Lurie about Byron and his lover Teresa. It fails to offer anything to the story; the half-hearted attempt at literature by Lurie is echoed by the half-hearted attempt by Coetzee.

I found myself lacking any interest in the characters, and the African landscape was not shown as beautiful or hideous... it was simply not shown. If I wasn't continually reminded the story took place in Africa, I wouldn't have noticed a difference. The prose was poor and the plot simply had trouble developing. After Lurie was relieved of his teaching duties, I had no interest in the rest of the novel. I read it in two days, simply because I did not want to devote any more time to it.

I would like to point out that there were a few interesting parts within the story, which I should have written down. It would have been nice had some of these insights been explored further, or used as central themes instead of the simplistic male impulses and challenging of social boundaries.

The only interesting twist was on the subject of 'disgrace' itself. Initially, you were meant to believe that the book would be about the disgrace of David Lurie. However, as the novel developed you could see that David's daughter Lucy, was just as disgraced despite being a victim rather than a perpetrator.

All in all, I would give this book 1 star... and overall, I am saddened that such a novel would be considered amongst the best of modern literature.

Travels with Charley | John Steinbeck

When I purchased this novel in Prince Edward Island, I had absolutely no idea what I was getting. I had just finished “The Winter of Discontent” by Steinbeck and needed to something to read to round out my vacation (there was no anticipation of needing more than two books on a two week trip). So in the midst of my travels, while in Charlottetown, I saw a book entitled “Travels with Charley” by the same author, which was a fitting end to my first unchartered journey since 2004.

This work of non-fiction is filled with tons of accurate realizations about travelling (I can confirm the accuracy based on just experiencing them). The one I like the most is, “you don’t take a journey, it takes you.” You can do all the planning that you want, but as soon as you get in the car, you are not the one in control. The trip is quite clearly a living organism and you are at its whim. The sooner you accept that, the more delightful trip you’re going to have.

Another theme is that no two trips are the same. As the trip takes on a life, gives you feeling and evokes an experience, it will never be completely comparable to someone else’s experience. In addition, you could take the exact same trip twice, and it would be a completely different experience, especially after the elapsing of time. Part of the experience is in your head as well, the mind wanderings experienced when viewing miles and miles of countryside.

Steinbeck talks about concepts such as “you can never go home”, the majesty of the American landscape, the different points of view of the American people and the difficulty and absurdity of painting an entire country of people with the same brush. The journey is completely timeless, which is to say that it is still applicable today. The detailing of the deep south in the middle of the desegregation (which existed in the time of this journey, in 1962) seemed completely disjointed from present day. This book is a testament to Steinbeck’s writing, that he can make you feel as if the journey is happening in present time… but this event is completely out of the ordinary and presents very interesting perspectives on the difficulty of changing mindsets.

So far I have neglected to mention the identity of Charley, which is in fact, Steinbeck’s poodle. There is a lot of discussion on the complexity of the canine, which you will either really appreciate or get really bored of. A lot of Steinbeck’s philosophies on his pooch I would agree with, based on my limited experiences with dogs. However, Steinbeck does do a lot of projecting and playful bantering which is tiring at times.

In conclusion, I really enjoyed this book. Steinbeck’s objective was to discover America. While reaching no definitive conclusions and stressing that his experiences were in no way a microcosm of life in America, the journey is very enjoyable to be on… the imagery of the countryside, the tales of characters and the mind of John Steinbeck.

QUOTATIONS:

"We have in the past been forced into reluctant change by the weather, calamity, and plague. Now the pressure comes from our biologic success as a species. We have overcome all enemies but ourselves." 175

"If the most versatile of living forms, the human, now fights for survival as it always has, it can eliminate not only itself but all other life." 192

"The ancients placed love and war in the hands of closely related gods. That was no accident. That, sir, was a profound knowledge of man." 233

Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters | J.D. Salinger

Salinger exited the writing scene in 1955 with the two short stories "Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters" and "Seymour - An Introduction," his last published works.

"Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters" takes place on Seymour's wedding day, from the perspective of his younger brother, Buddy. However, the story is not really about the wedding at all. It's about coping with life when you're a recluse. Those of you who know the story of Salinger's reclusive life are probably lying to yourself. Nobody knows the story, because that is precisely how he wants it. As a background, Salinger pulled the 1st edition of his famous novel "The Catcher in the Rye" in 1951 because there was a picture of him on the back panel. Salinger had never agreed to the photo, and it was subsequently removed in later editions. One of the only other pictures of Salinger in public circulation is courtesy of his daughter, who had apparently included the photo on her book to slight her father… and I anticipate, garner interest for herself. But, I digress.

Salinger is a master with characters. You cannot help but being intrigued with the lives of people in his novel. His mastery of the first person narrative allows you to relate to the character telling the story, and as such, the people you see through his eyes. That being said, the premise of the novel was very weak. He has made a few comments on the state of society in addition to a few points on what it means to be a reclusive personality. However, he never really explains why this condition arises. The emotion is not there, whereas it dripped from "The Catcher in the Rye" like melting snow on a warm day. Maybe the next short story, "And Seymour" will give me a glimpse into these emotions and answer the question "Why?"

A Thousand Splendid Suns | Khaled Hosseini

People may not know the name Khaled Hosseini, but most are familiar with his work. “The Kite Runner” has been one of the most popular novels since it’s publication in 2004. With the war in Afghanistan in the forefront of many North American’s minds since September 11th, 2001, Hosseini picked a great time to introduce citizens to the culture in his native country.

“A Thousand Splendid Suns” is his second such work. This novel details, in specific, the role of a woman in Afghanistan. Unlike the modern media, this book gives a more accurate depiction of what real life is like, in a country facing over 30 years of war. While the author managed to escape the country in 1980, I would venture that he has visited Afghanistan many times since including stints as part of his United Nations work.

The novel is madding, gruesome and painful - but extremely heartfelt. In my opinion, it contains one of those most evil villains in literature of our time since Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four.” The book gives us similar cultural tidbits as “The Kite Runner” did, but I find the story is less enjoyable. While it was definitely a page turner, it did not strike as passionate a chord in me as “The Kite Runner” did.

It felt like the novel wrapped everything up in a neat little package, but did so in a formulaic way. Eating a bowl of ice cream is a great indulgence, but eating a carton of it leaves you sick and teaches you that there was a time where you should have just stopped. This novel has that feeling to me, but I’m sure it will do very well with the popular culture crowd. After reading Hardy’s “Tess of D’Ubervilles” days before, however; it’s difficult to view Hosseini’s novel as great literature.

He is, however, a great storyteller. His novel flows extremely well, his characters draw you in and reading a book written by him produces images unequalled through the cinema.

As I stated after reading and discussing “The Kite Runner”, it would be interesting to see Hosseini write a novel on another topic not set in Afghanistan. It wouldn’t be nearly as profitable, but it would allow us to see Hosseini’s storytelling in a new light… and see if he can repeat his early successes.

The Galapagos | Kurt Vonnegut

Reading a book by Vonnegut is always an adventure; you never know what to expect. I'm going to sum up this novel in a line or two:

This book is about the near destruction of the human race due to their "very big brains" and the 1,000,000 year evolution of the species that follows.

I really should have been writing down quotes as I will not be able to do this novel justice without. The Galapagos was a hilarious (and accurate, IMO) take on the current world and of course, our inevitable decline. It's not all doom and gloom, but Vonnegut takes constant 'shots' of our society. I remember one part where he mentioned that human beings like to think of the most destructive thing they can do, insist on the fact that they will never do it in reality, and then do it anyway (ex: buildings intended solely for mass genocide).

Also making an appearance is Vonnegut's favourite character, unpopular science fiction writer "Kilgore Trout." I won't ruin how he enters the story, however.

So I realize this is rambling on and on and on and so on. If you have yet to read Vonnegut, then I suggest doing so immediately. For those of you who are as into Darwin and Natural Selection as I am, I would definitely read this book when you want a light moment to poke fun of the world. I haven't read "Slaughterhouse-Five" in a long time (his most acknowledged book), but I do think I enjoyed this read better. If I can look back, I'll find some quotes so you can appreciate his unique style and humour.

---

Next book on tap is "Tess of the D'Ubervilles" by Thomas Hardy.

The Paper Men | William Golding

I don't know what prompted me to read "The Paper Men", but a couple of days ago I decided to give the third Golding book on my shelf a try. After reading "Lord of the Flies" in high school (and enjoying it) and "Darkness Visible" earlier this year (and disliking it), I figured I'd give Golding another chance to redeem himself. He did not.

I dove into the book with no preconceptions, as I had no idea what it was about. Without spoilers, here is a brief synopsis:

Wilfrid Barclay, a 60 year old alcoholic author, is all washed up. He drinks like a fish and travels all over the world. He treats people in his life that are 'close' to him (which are few), like garbage and never really understands if he's living in a dream or a stupor, but for him, that is life. This book reminds me of "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", without the drug induced hallucinations (most here are alcohol related) and without pretty much everything that made the latter interesting.

Rick Tucker is an Associate Professor who follows Barclay around in his travels, attempting to get him to sign over biographical writes to him. He offers everything he has and has no sense of moral integrity, giving into all Barclay's degrading demands.

I have not delved into research enough to determine if the main character is based on Golding himself, largely because I don't really care. This character was so boring; events, while described very well from the point of view of a confused alcoholic, were altogether uninteresting. The point never quite hit the mark, and the novel circled the earth in uneventful ways to get at it.

Overall, stick clear of this book.

[No quotes - although due to absurdity of the main character, some were very witty. That being said, nothing was profound].

The Time in Between | David Bergen

This novel, which won the 2005 Giller Prize, I read in two days (which is remarkable for someone with my slow reading skills). The book was written with a tremendous fluidity that kept you turning the pages.

It's a story about a man who goes to Vietnam, to confront his demons, a couple of decades after he fought there in the war. Charles Boatman is looking for something, but doesn't know what that something is. He gets lost, and his two children go there to find him... and end up getting to know their father better, and falling in love with the country of Vietnam. There are some twists, and I don't delve at all into the main points, but it's a fairly interesting read. 3.5 stars (out of 5).

I'm going to end this passage with a couple of my favourite quotes from the novel.

"This is the case, isn't it?" Vu said. "We set sail in a particular direction, certain of the route, and then find ourselves... adrift."

...

"This is what happens, isn't it? A man has a vision which is not political, but others make it so, and so the vision is made smaller because some person of little consequence decides that the man with the vision is too big, too proud."

...

"Charles sat in a chair and watched the sun rise. It came quickly, red turing to orange and then yellow and finally white. He recalled mornings like this on the mountain where the children were younger, mornings when he sat and waiting for their voices or the padding of their feet, and always it was Ada who came to him first, settling into his lap, the smell of sleep on her breath, her bare arms around his neck. "Daddy," she said, and nothing more. She didn't need more. Sitting there, her head pressed against his neck, was enough."

A Prayer for Owen Meany | John Irving

You are not a fan of literature, if you don't feel something strong for little Owen Meany. In fact, as I write this... I feel I know what he would say to that: WHY DOES EVERYONE INSIST ON CALLING ME LITTLE, AS IF IT IS A DISEASE?

Owen was someone who you just couldn't help but like. His voice threw you for a loop, his height made you take him lightly... but Owen inspired everyone, and he commanded respect. His brash actions had a purpose to them, potentially because he believed everything happend FOR A REASON. His proclamation that he was "GOD'S INSTRUMENT" not only baffled religious church goer'ers (pun intended), but also the very ministers who preached about a higher power.

Now, I have never been a "religious man." Ask me what I was baptized as, and I couldn't tell you. Ask me my philosophies on organized religion, and you will not hear the words that you would ever want to repeat in a congragation filled with the converted. No, I am a man who questions religion but does not entirely cast it aside. My beliefs about religion are the same as my beliefs about a lot of things. Present to me an argument or an opinion, and I will make a decision on it. If I cannot, I will think hard about it.


This book, however, isn't about religion. It's about faith, but it's also about the state of our society, the principles we uphold and the fears we face (or run from). It's about challenging people and principles, and making an impact in the world by being who you are. Owen Meany was ahead of his time. His words from the 60's mirror some of the problems that society is still faced with today. His best friend, and the rest of us, live with the lessons he taught us... in this world filled with questions of faith and morality, and feelings of hopelessness.


Strongly recommend that you give this one a go.

Darkness Visible | William Golding

You may or may not know that I refuse to read the backs, sideflaps, forewards, etc of any book before I have read it. As such, as soon as I finished Darkness Visible, I read everything I could get my hands on. Reason being: it was so obscure, that I wanted to see if anyone 'got it'.

After reading a bunch of reviews, I found out that people are all over the map on this one. There was only really one person, I more-or-less agreed with.

The book is essentially about a boy named Matty that survives a fire and is scarred for life. As a child, he witnesses the death of a school acquaintance and is blamed for it by his child-molesting teacher. Matty never gets over the thought of letting his teacher down. He becomes very religious, and experiments with the idea of divinity as well as the occult (it is not known for sure, which he embraces more).

The parrallel story involves two twins, who grew up quite wholesomely, it seems. Sophy, the less attractive of the two, continues to vie for her father's attention (who is preoccupied with finding a wife). She ends up despising her father, moving in with a thief and getting into sexual and unlawful mischief involving kidnapping of children of political figures.

Anyway, the book is interesting... and the theme around 'vieing for attention from role models' seems to be central to the novel, IMO. Terrorist & sexual mischief all seem to stem from this central theme. There is an attempt to explain the darkness of man, and how people are governed by this impulse that they cannot explain or fight... they find themselves doing what the darkness tells them to. It's interesting, but not explained very well by Golding.

Overall, I give this book a 3/5.

The Kite Runner | Khalid Hosseini

Fitting that this book would have captivated me enough to forget how important it was to eat, to sustain motor functioning. I just finished it now, so soon my fast will be over.

Where do I begin? The book was touching, honest and informative... traits that all good books should have, in my opinion. Funny part was, I could see it also being named "You Remind me of me", the last bookclub book I had read (which was touching but not honest or informative).

There is a part in The Kite Runner where he talks about movies... how in Afghanistan, everyone would ask about the ending to describe what the movie is about. However, in America, no one wants to know about the ending. As such, I will provide no spoilers here.

The book explores powerful themes of regret and longing. There is an interesting part where the main character's father talks about how all crimes of theivery. If you murder someone, you steal someone's life. All those close to the victim, you steal future moments from. There are plenty of powerful themes that will stick with me... and in such a time in my life, it re-inforces that there are others that try to live by principles, even if they get all messed up sometimes. It's good to know that even though people get 'messed up', some will still try to find a way back to their principles however hard it is to do so.

You Remind Me of Me | Dan Chaon

Well, I am now finished "You Remind me of me" ...I'll do a quick synopsis without spoilers. There is a mother that punishes herself for letting her first born become adopted before she sees it. The 2nd born son is neglected by the mother and has issues revolving around family, love, acceptance... but has a lot of human compassion. He meets his brother by getting a job in a bar that he works in... and doesn't reveal himself. There's a lot more to it than that, but I don't want to give things away.

The problem is, the book is like an oreo. Boring on one end, boring on the other... with some congealed goodness on the inside. The problem is, you never really trust the middle... it could be made of cow cartilage ground together or it could be a sweet man-made substance. Regardless, the mystery of whether it's cartilage or man-made really doesn't matter because it's just not that good of a cookie.

The best cookies are made with passion and an open eye to the world. This cookie was fabricated... and my pallet has grown accustomed to cookies made with emotion.

Lazy writing style throughout... not really meant to be anything other than a decent story. I think it just has to do with the talent of the writer... just not something you would fall in love with.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas | Hunter S. Thompson

"You can turn your back on a person, but never turn your back on a drug - especially when it's waiving a razor-sharp hunting knife in your eyes."

Finished reading "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" the other day, and it was truly a great novel. Thompson states it was a failed attempt at the subject of Gonzo Journalism, but I'm not completely concrete on the term. It was a very interesting account of trying to find the American Dream, and was based partly on Thompson's real life experiences. Scary. Set in the post-60's drug era, it's essentially a book about a drugged out journalist with his drugged out attorney.

"As your attorney, I suggest you...[insert anything from doing a particular drug to wrestling with an aligator here]."

The perspectives are completely honest, which makes this novel both scary and interesting at the same time. Anyway, I believe I've already talked about how accurate the movie was, so I'll leave it at that. Okay, one more quote.

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." -Dr. Johnson

Warrior of the Light | Paulo Coelho

Since I've been doing a lot of exam studying, there has only been some light reading.

I've just finished Paulo Coelho's 'Warrior of the Light' which has some inspirational quotes. A lot of them are pretty wishy-washy, in my opinion... but I'll quote my favourite... as it relates to my life, as it may yours.

"Sometimes the Warrior feels as if he were living two lives at once.

In one of them he is obliged to do all the things he does not want to do and to fight for ideas in which he does not believe. But there is another life, and he discovers it in his dreams, in his reading, and in his encounters with people who share his ideas.

The Warrior allows his two lives to draw near. 'There is a bridge that links what I do with what I would like to do,' he thinks. Slowly, his dreams take over his everyday life, and then he realizes that he is ready for the thing he always wanted.

Then all that is needed is a litter daring, and his two lives become one."