BonusBlog! Children's Book - Warriors: The Sight

Is it ironic that perhaps the hardest book I read for Genius Hour is a children's book? After receiving suggestions from Brandon and Steven to attempt a children's book, I was reluctant at first, as I kind of established the precedent that I will be reading literary classics, or at least books that are part of the literary canon. Now, where does Warriors: Power of Three #1: The Sight, a fantasy children's' book made in 2007 about domesticated cats in the wild, fit into that equation? It doesn't, but it wouldn't be a true Genius Hour project if I didn't follow the goals I set originally. So let's begin with my bonus blog where I'll do whatever I want.

This was me reading this book, I think.  Are somewhat irrelevant photos a sight to behold or an eyesore? Comment down below.

As I mentioned before, the book was incredibly demanding of me. For a children's book, 360 pages is considerable compared to some of the more appealing series that are available like Magic Tree House or A to Z Mysteries. Nevertheless, during fourth grade, I begged my parents to get the Power of Three trilogy promising that I would read it cover to cover. My entreaties were answered, but I never honestly read this more-than-likely $30 collection. When cracking open this book for the first time since elementary, I still had my Garfield "Read with clean paws!" bookmark indicating my progress. I only made it a meager 25 pages.

Surely, I had read much longer books at the time. The year before I started my favorite series, Tunnels, with the first book being an impressive 450 pages. It didn't bother me much at the time though, as long as I was enjoying the book, I wanted to stay in the world created as long as possible. So, I guess what I'm trying to say here in here is that I didn't enjoy the world of Warriors. Matter of fact, I was bored to the point of disgust. Hence, my lack of initiative with this book. Surprisingly or not, reading about domestic cats in a clan eating, sleeping, and playing (all things regular cats do) is not that interesting.

Here's how the factions are organized. I was expecting the majority of conflict to come from the division of clans. Instead, all I found was an amusing catfight.

Usually, I would give an example here that credits the author in some way and to give him somewhat of a defense, but nothing stands out to me. The most I can say to the author is: "Well you did your one and only plot twist in the first 40 pages and you got me." Apparently, the kitten we were following was blind and I had actually no premonition that the kitten was. All I noticed is that the descriptive style of the author seemed to focus more on the sensual than the visual, but that's small potatoes.

As a result of the kitten's disability, he's not respected as well as his other clanmates, and they don't believe he can be a true warrior, and he tries to show those tabby warriors that he's just as good as all the rest of them, and he wants them to see that he doesn't need their help, and . . . . Oh sorry, dozed off like I did with the majority it with the book. Gosh, is it boring! Maybe it would be more interesting if I could relate, but even then the characters are simply monotonous. Jaypaw, the blind kitten, blatantly ignored the rules set for him like five times. It's annoying, and it isn't a likable sort of annoying, it's a frustrating type of annoying.

  19th-century drawing of a mean-looking tabby cat in a catloaf

Let's see what else I have in my notes for this book. (If you can't focus on a book about domestic cats fighting, by the way, that's my tip -- take notes.) Going into the book, I thought that cats were substituted into it just to gain appeal from both genders. If you remember back in the elementary days, books were not exactly sexist, but it was fairly obvious who they were trying to appeal to. Girls got all those horse novels which I couldn't understand the popularity of, and boys got sports novels, which I admittedly couldn't understand the popularity of either. Nevertheless, for the most part, that's how it was and still is with children's books.

I've actually read both of these while waiting for my mom to get done with shopping. Although they might appear like direct ripoffs of Diary of a Wimpy Kid, the difference for both of them is that they're actually not funny, more irritating than anything.

This cover is painful to look at.

I assume you'll get my point simple enough with the pictures and I don't really need to go into any more depth. Anyways, I thought the characters were cats simply because needed to gain some traction with girls in tandem with the boyish fantasy, so, cats. However, the author tries to do better than the bare minimum than just a 1 to 1 substitute. Instead of he said, it's now he meowed. Instead of congratulating each other, they rub muzzles. And, again, they spend most of their times doing cat things with each other.

One of the things that I never exactly understood while reading the book was sharing tongues with each other. At first, I thought it was just cat-kissing, but I realized they were cleaning each other. It may not be that interesting reading cats cleaning themselves, but, to be fair, it is what cats would do. Albeit, if I apply my Penultimate Lit Analysis goggles, the characters being cats doesn't add to anything. They're just domestic cats out in the wild, it's more of a medium for the themes than anything.

My domestic cat being precious under some bushes

The main meat of any novel is conflict and that is perhaps Warriors: The Sight's biggest shortcoming. Let me paws and reflect on what the dominant conflict was in the book. Well, there were some foxes on the clan's territory in the beginning. Jaypaw, the blind cat, tries hunting them down with his siblings. He then falls off a cliff or something. After that, he begins his training as a warrior. He's frustrated, getting a trainer who pities him. He realizes that he can see in people's dreams somehow (it's not really explained). He almost drowns the next day going for a walk. There's a clan fight. I was actually kind of excited for this, expecting the majority of the book to involve these type of conflicts. But then I realized this is a children's book, nothing's going to happen and these are domestic cats after all. Unfortunately, I was right, the furry warriors ended up with some scratches and I ended up with amusing visions of a blind cat swiping and yowling at other cats.

The tension between the clans is never exposed again, yet the book figures a way to continue for 125 pages.  The book continues with a pack of dogs and a spread of fever throughout the clans. The book ends with Jaypaw being called a hero. I could as much just lie for the ending with something less predictable and you would never be the wiser though. Why not? In actuality, it turned out Jaypaw was just in a coma and he was dreaming of what it would be like to be blind. That's better.

There's character development progressively throughout the novel, but it's far too shallow. Jaypaw believes he can serve his clan with the best, others make him question if he's able to, then, in the end, his original notions are reinforced, he realizes there are other ways to serve his clan than being a warrior.

Thermograph of various body parts of a cat. (Insert relation to blog here) Cats had a fever in the book. One almost died to the illness, but Jaypaw went into his dream and revived him somehow.

Personally, I disagree with Publisher's Weekly's review of Warriors: The Sight. Their review of the book supposedly represents much of the general consensus of the book, stating: "Action packed. Certain to please any young reader who has ever wondered what dreams of grandeur may haunt the family cat." For one, my cat doesn't dream about being in a clan fighting cats and struggling to find food. She dreams about being soft, of comfort, and how much she wants to go outside only so that she can want to go inside. Secondly, define action-packed, is it just that one fight that took place that makes it "action-packed." It's a terrible thing when I can compare a children's book having as much action as the novels I read. Lastly, I was a child when I tried to read this; I had a different, now-deceased cat at the time, but that didn't compel me, and it still doesn't with my new cat.

Perhaps the biggest issue with my lack of initiative didn't stem from the content of the book, it was the why to this book. With each book I begin, there's always that subconscious question of why I should read it. I don't have an answer for reading this book. Compared this to the hassle I've faced with much more challenging books I've completed for the blogs, such as Dracula or The Divine Comedy, their impact on literature and culture is undeniable. Here, with Warriors: The Sight the only reason as to why I kept on going with this book is because I told you guys all about my plans for my bonus blog, I couldn't just give up. So, I thank you all for the initiative and support you've provided.  I can't think of any big takeaway so as we've reached the tail's end of my blog, I'll just force a bunch of cat puns.

Warriors: The Sight wasn't a cat-astrophe, but it wasn't paws-itively purrfect either. I felt like I wasted meowrs reading this book, but it did provide inspurrtation for what might turn out to be litter-aly one of my best blogs. I mew what I was getting into originally, I just wished it did something to purrprise me.

According to Wikipedia, some cultures are superstitious about black cats, ascribing either good or bad luck to them.

MetaBlog™: I've also trademarked BonusBlog™. Two trademarks are an accomplishment. I'm not going to actually reflect on my blog, I feel like I summarized much of where I am to go from here with the last MetaBlog. I don't really see a necessity in it. This was fun as always. My goal for this blog is to get Two Views, so we'll see if I accomplished that or if I was just talking to myself with this blog.

Week 7 - In the Spirit of Genius Hour: A Mystery

Why, I remember the good old days, devouring all 26 A to Z Mysteries along with my typical assemblage of books. I remember my third-grade (Mrs. Roesler for any of you Highland Park veterans) teacher saying that there was no way I could read all the books I had claimed, primarily referencing me picking out one of the A to Z Mysteries from the library the same day I finished it. However, I did. Do I remember anything from the books? Nope, but who does at a young age with those type of books. All I remember now is from the x book in the series where a person fell off a carousel and broke his elbow.

Upon reflection, I couldn't say why I was so addicted to these books. I've never actually read a mystery since elementary, their appeal doesn't really fit my niche, so I usually pass them looking for something more ... rewarding. I've always had the notion that mysteries are fairly dry and unrewarding and it didn't help when I did attempt the genre again after a two-year hiatus with The Complete Sherlock Holmes. If you ever ask something that I don't have any interest in reading in the prospective future, there's your answer. But as my title says, this concluding blog raises a glass to Genius Hour. It toasts the opportunities provided and, as Genius Hour is about trying new things, here I am trying a genre that I haven't touched in eight years, the mystery. To represent the genre, the selection for this week is the most popular novel by the most popular mystery writer - And Then There Were None by Agatha Christie.

You know, fun fact Agatha Christie, as I saw smacked on my book, as you'll probably see on any book of hers, precedes only Shakespeare and the Bible, in books sold originating from one source. When I read that originally, I didn't know how to feel. Good for her I guess, you can tell how big an ego an author has by the size of their nameplate, and judging by the size of her's, it must take a lot to maintain.  Like you may have been able to infer, I don't know why mysteries are such a popular genre, but now that I've read And Then There Were None it has become apparent to me. Mysteries are gripping.

While I should've been working on vital scholarship essays, I was binging this book. I actually started and finished it on the same day, which is remarkable, because all the other books I've read would typically take a span of a week to complete. The plot of the book is simple enough, except for some of the words, I comprehended it just as easily as I would watch an episode of Scooby Doo in sixth grade. The novel begins with going in each of the character's perspectives, all with the same destination in mind to Soldier Island. Supposedly, they've been requested for a party with a friend who they haven't met in ages. The ten of them are a wild bunch of characters. One's a doctor, one's a zealous, religious old woman, one's a judge, one's a twenty-something who races cars through the streets of England, and so on and so forth. They arrive on the island feeling that something is off.  Their promised friends aren't there and they have yet to see their hosts. An excellent dinner calms their anxiety, that is until a phonograph reveals the true reason they are were all invited:

"You are charged with the following indictments: Edward George Armstrong, that you did upon the 14th day of March of 1925, cause the death of Louisa Mary Clees. Emily Caroline Brent, that upon the 5th of November, 1931, you were responsible for the death of Beatrice Taylor. Philip Lombard that upon a date in February 1932, you were guilty of the death of 21 men, members of an East African tribe . . ." All the charges are given out with most people charged with the murder of one or two deaths, but for brevity, I'll cut that out. The phonograph ends with: "Prisoners at the bar, have you anything to say in your defense?"

Engaging isn't it? At least I thought it was, at first, I was expecting the cliched dinner mystery where one of these colorful characters will be found dead once lightning strikes. Instead, what I got was a plot where they discover that there really is no one else on the island besides them, that means one of them organized this and plans to inflict the punishment from there on. It's clever in how it's done too, albeit a little bit forced at times.

It follows an old British nursery rhyme Ten Little Ni***rs, to make it more, um, politically correct it was then changed to Ten Little Indians in the American version, still racist nevertheless, it was finally changed to Ten Little Soldiers in most recent versions. Apparently, according to readers of Christie, casual racism is very common in her publications, in case you could tell from the past quote where 21 African deaths placed on the same level as one white person. It doesn't even serve a purpose as far as I can tell, it just seems out of nowhere (there is not any ethnicity besides the English in Then There Were None). I would consider the novel timeless, if there weren't actual discussions on why the crime of killing 21 Africans isn't that big of a deal between characters, I honestly kind of laughed in how spontaneous it appeared. Anyways, that was just something I wanted to get off my chest, back to the nursery rhyme.

Ten little soldier boys went out to dine;
One choked his little self and then there were Nine.
Nine little soldier boys sat up very late;
One overslept himself and then there were Eight.
Eight little soldier boys traveling in Devon;
One said he'd stay there and then there were Seven.
Seven little soldier boys chopping up sticks;
One chopped himself in halves and then there were Six.
Six little soldier boys playing with a hive;
A bumblebee stung one and then there were Five.
Five little soldier boys going in for law;
One got into Chancery and then there were Four.
Four little soldier boys going out to sea; A red herring swallowed one and then there were Three.
Three little soldier boys walking in the Zoo;
A big bear hugged one and then there were Two.
Two little soldier boys sitting in the sun;
One got frizzled up and then there was One.
One little soldier boy left all alone;
He went and hanged himself
And then there were None.

Final conflict at the end of the book

The novel creatively follows the rhyme with half the fun coming in the guessing of how the next death will follow this script. Like the third to last stanza being that a big bear hugged one for how his life was ended, well how does that correlate to a manor on a desolate island. In the end, you discover that a big bear-shaped clock clunked his skull after being pushed down from a two-story window. Yes, the landing may be improbable and silly at the same time. But really, I think that is what gripped me the most, I wanted to know what and who the next murder would be and, ultimately, who was committing the crime in the first place.

When I say unrewarding about the mystery genre, I am not implying that the ending are unsatisfactory, I mean that the subjects and themes touched upon are somewhat shallow with them probably not adding much to my literary experience. Which, although Agatha Christie surprised me with the themes and symbols present, they are still somewhat lackluster. Some are stronger than others, the novel took a unique examination on the administration of justice.

Paraphrasing what the character in the book saying why he did it all, "The law cannot reach these crimes the people commited. Thus, I must take matters into my own hands." Christie then raises the question who can really dictate punishments and whether or not they are worthy of them. What is justice after all, Christie proposes. It's an interesting theme, but at first glance, I didn't really catch on to the message, I was too busy trying to deduce who the killer was and seeing the residents slowly devolve into panic. But I see the broadspread appeal of mysteries both for people who are looking for a thrill in their books and for literary critics looking for something deeper beneath the surface. It's a good mesh that Christie does, to me, the way she composed it makes it so what I read is with a greater intention than it just being pulp.

And Then There Were None would take me on a spiraling ride that I would complete before I knew it. The book would end on a totally satisfying note answering any remaining questions that I may have which only adds to my experience of the blog. Contrary to my previous beliefs, it was a rewarding experience for me and probably my favorite book I have read during the entire blog. I completely why one would get so addicted to the genre now, I plan on reading more of this genre soon after I learn of some more remarkable mysteries. Which, I concede, is probably not the best as I was aiming to develop an enthusiasm for the more complex books I would read throughout.

It's nothing to sweat though, as here's the secret to reading all those complex, convoluted books you may hear so much about: don't. If you really want to get into reading and not take a couple months to read, say, The Divine Comedy, before that read what's on the more appealing side for you. That could be mysteries like And Then There Were None, sci-fi, or thrillers. At least, that's what I did to get myself back into reading late in the tenth grade. I loved Kurt Vonnegut's prose in his sci-fi writing, and I would read away no matter how unpopular or basic the book may have been because I loved his sardonic personality in his writing. Later on, when I read every book the library had to offer from him, I figured it was time to expand my horizons, and what better way to start it off by reading sci-fi classics, and I worked from there outwards. Maybe that's a preview of my Ted Talk in the works, I just thought it would complement what may be my last blog.



Juxtaposing my actual blog, a longer, more scrutinizing MetaBlog

Of course, following the penultimate, that was my last blog, it requires some falling action on my part and that was one of my intentions in style here. I didn't want to make it to grandiose, just keep it simple. I took inspiration from videos that I watch every December titled Disneycember with Doug Walker, they're short and satisfying reviews much like the mystery was for me, which is what I wanted to accomplish with this blog. I always ask did I accomplish what I set out to do with the blog this week. I always respond with a more or less noncommital sure, maybe I could've made some additions here and there, but I don't think I left much out in terms of content this week. So, in conclusion, I am satisfied with my blog and, really, my Genius Hour as a whole. Everything went smoothly. Procrastination wasn't much of an issue. Sure I may have finished blogs at midnight, but that was more or less poor planning on my part thinking that starting the write-up at 7:00 p.m. would be adequate time, typically my book I planned to read were finished a week before my blog. Nevertheless, I feel like I met my goals and read some interesting books along the way, so it has been a positive experience for me.

Week 6 - My late Thanksgiving Dysfunctional Familytacular - As I Lay Dying

Pulling up Kid Cudi's "Pursuit of Happiness" on youtube. Ah, yep feels good, now let's begin. This time with an exciting Lit Analysis focusing on symbols, irony, and prose. As this may be my second to the last blog, it needs to be excellent. This will be the Game of Thrones Episode 9 of blogs -- the penultimate. I need to show that this is what the blog has been leading up to, preparing me for. To show that I've learned something, made progress, that I'm not just coasting along, is my intended goal here. This will be an in-depth analysis of a book, similar to the ending essays in How to Read Literature Like a Professor. Don't worry though, I'll still be following the typical blog tone so it won't be as dry.

So, I've planned out this penultimate book analysis way back when making the Shark Tank Presentation with the classic William Faulkner's As I Lay Dying. It was for numerous reasons. William Faulkner is revered by many literary enthusiasts for his exemplary prose and symbolism which is perfect for my penultimate lit analysis. As I Lay Dying is Faulkner's self-described magnum opus, so out of the books he wrote, I selected this one as he must've used all his tools in his literary toolbox to be so proud of it. I was correct, however, it just took me a couple more hours than preferred to figure them out.



I originally thought the week 6 blog would be released around Thanksgiving and I thought this book would be great for my Thanksgiving Dysfunctional Familytacular. What a shame, though. I guess the book's still relevant, maybe not as timely, however. The book follows the Bundren's family trek across the Missipian countryside to bury their wife and mother Addie, going through all of their perspectives on the journey. Of course, it isn't as simple with the Bundren family. They're a stubborn, manly (I'll get into what I mean by that later) bunch who accepts no charity until forced to accept it. Along the way, there will be many symbols and events that will illustrate their problematic family dynamics. So, I got my How to Read Literature like a Professor and my scribbles that vaguely look like notes on As I Lay Dying, so let's begin with some of those symbols.



Tools in the novel are significant in how they represent their family. Cash Bundren tries to mend the family together with his tools. He makes the coffin for his mother who is on her deathbed. He is aiming for unrealistic perfection in his coffin, trying to show his love to his unappreciative mother and make his family rejoice upon something. Actually, according to How to Read Literature like a Professor, this would probably be one of their claimed Christ figures. Personally, I always feel like these Christ figures are forced or just rely on pure speculation, but, for once, I'll digress. With the list given in the book, he does meet four of the criteria given.

• Employed as a carpenter. Check, a year before he was installing a roof on a church and actually fell off, so that actually adds to it.
• In agony. Check, when he broke his leg after their mule wagon failed at fording a river, Anse Bundren, his dad, poured concrete on it as some sort of cast. This only worsened it, and at the book end's, a doctor chipping off the concrete, states that he'll probably never be able to use his leg again because of how his dad treated it.
• Self-sacrificing. Check, after their wagon crashed and he has a broken leg, Cash remains stoic. Essentially, he says, don't worry about my broken leg, keep on going. To continue their quest, he sacrifices his long-held dream in life, a gramophone. He gives his funds to Anse so they could purchase some new mules.
• Came to redeem an unworthy world. Check, this is where the tools come in. The tools represent him making efforts to fix and correct his broken family.

Even when I do this Christ figure thing with evidence to support it, it still feels flimsy, but I believe Faulkner did intend to portray Cash as a Christ figure to elucidate a point. My experience coming from the Is He Serious and Other Ironies chapter of How to Read Literature Like A Professor, i.e., irony trumps everything. The Christ figure that he's portrayed as valiantly sacrifices a leg, but for what? To bury his mother? They could've paused at a town to address his leg with someone who actually has experience, instead, he says continue, don't worry about my leg. So while typically a Christ figure commits a sacrifice for the greater good, here there's no reason to it. With that irony, Faulkner basically attacks manliness and heroism in situations where it is pointless. At first Cash's martyrdom seems noble, but after he tolerates it just fine when finding out that his leg is destroyed, it becomes ridiculous.



Remember the first chapter of How to Read Literature like a Professor? (Let's start calling it Lit. like Prof. to save space, by the way.) It was on the whole idea behind quests being a way of development for the characters involved. Here with the quest in As I Lay Dying, the quest to bury their mother and wife is used ironically. At the end of it they are successful in their mission, but even though there were defining moments where the Bundren family could have developed, they instead resided and remained in their old ways.

At the end of the novel, (I don't think anyone is reading this or has any future plans at the moment to read it, so I'm fine with spoiling it) it turns out this whole trek wasn't about burying Anse's wife Addie, instead, it was about Anse getting a new pair of teeth from the orthodontist in the town where the cemetery was located. In the end, ironically the quest proves to be more destructive than helpful to the family. One son now has lost a leg. Another is now in a mental hospital for his actions. Admittedly, I don't understand everything, that's why I leave some things vague. The daughter/ sister of the family finds herself increasingly more distrustful of men and increasingly desperate to end her pregnancy. Another son has lost his cherished horse that he worked months to attain, sold by his dad. Overall, the only one who profited from this quest, although his character remains the same, was Anse who at the end of it got rid of his deceased wife, a new pair of teeth, and, with barely two seconds with Addie being in the grave, a new wife. The ending quote involves him addressing his family, "'It's Cash and Jewel and Vardaman and Dewey Dell,' pa says, kind of hangdog and proud too, with his teeth and all, even if he wouldn't look at us, "Meet Mrs. Bundren," he says. Ooh, commentary on woman's roles two weeks in a row. With this ending, Faulkner basically mocks how women are perceived in society as being replaceable, simply fulfilling basic roles and not much else. Or at least that's how I interpreted it, I could easily be wrong there.

Let's discuss the hardest aspect of reading As I Lay Dying. The way it was written, woof it's hard. Like I mentioned above, I didn't fully understand everything that was going on. In the book, Darl, one of the sons, gets so frustrated with his family that he attempts to incinerate his mother's coffin. I figured that out 50 pages after the event took place. When Cash talked about him being sent to a mental asylum, I was blindsided. When did this happen, I asked. You see this book employs stream of consciousness which some of you may be familiar with, but I don't think we have ever covered explicitly in any class, so I'll cover it now. Stream of consciousness goes into different people minds, following their flow of thoughts as events take place. Imagine it being basically all your thoughts written down with the general cohesion those thoughts may have. Here, stream of consciousness is invaluable to your reading experience in As I Lay Dying. Instead of an objective narration on the subject, it puts you into the mind of the character and gives you a much better idea of the character, their perspective, and their beliefs.

Should I try stream of consciousness blogging for my next genius hour? I'll basically just write on whatever for a couple hours.

Here's an example of what I mean, this is in the perspective of Anse: "I have done no wrong to be cussed by. I am not religious, I reckon. But peace is my heart: I know it is. I have done things but neither better nor worse than them that pretend otherlike, and I know that Old Marster will care for me as for ere a sparrow that falls." Stream of consciousness is great at creating empathy and sympathy with our characters, but its inherent flaw is that when that same voice is used to describe an event that is going on, at times I found it incomprehensible to decipher what was going on. This was my main struggle with doing an analysis of As I Lay Dying, that type of writing, in any book really, proves to be so obstinate that I was completely lost.

Well, that was my Penultimate Lit Analysis. As I Lay Dying was a unique experience for me with its writing style, and with the angle of analyzing, it certainly was a challenge. This blog isn't my longest, but man, it sure takes a while to write about symbols and all that jazz. I've probably spent more time on this one than others that I've written. With most of my time spent skimming through the book trying to spark ideas. Of course, there's still a lot more symbols I didn't even touch, I didn't even talk about the fact that it was set in the south, for one. I had to be realistic with myself though with who my audience was. I doubt many, if any, of you, have read the book, and a lot of you considered Lit. like Prof. to be rather dry, and I can't crack many jokes with the focus of literary analysis. Oh well, I'm saving them up for the next one. Was it penultimate? Meh, I wish Brandon would get off the computer earlier so I could've started it earlier for one. I'll leave that up for you to decide.

Short, concise MetaBlog:
I need some sleep. I technically finished this blog on Friday, actually. No one's probably going to notice my blog missing at 12:20 a.m., so it is not too much of a concern. Literary analysis is hard guys.

Week 5 - Modern Lit: Handmaid's Tale

Irony is:
  "We won't be the only one to compare Margaret Atwood's haunting novel to Anthony Burgess's A Clockwork Orange--it's that frightening. Atwood examines life after the extreme right has had its way. Believe us, you won't want to live that long. Read this novel--then contribute to your favorite liberal cause."
  -Playboy (this was 1985-86 Playboy by the way)

Thought about doing a Playboy cover as a joke, but I figure that may be out of my bounds for a school blog. I hope you get the irony nevertheless.

I don't give modern literature a chance. I think out of the 30 books I've read this year only two of them have been what most would call modern: The Life of Pi and Closing Time. The Life of Pi I read just because I saw a discussion on it on Reddit which inspired me to read it and I needed to change things up. That's partially why I am reading modern literature here, to change things up. Closing Time I read because it's the little-known sequel that came forty years after one of my favorite books Catch-22. Matter of fact, I was inspired to read The Divine Comedy after a discussion on the book between two of the characters. Matter of fact, Dante and The Divine Comedy is referenced in The Canterbury Tales, the book we're currently reading in class. MATTER OF FACT, the book I read alludes to how many of the stories were titled in The Canterbury Tale (i.e.,  [possessive role in society here] tale). In the book, the main character is a handmaid or a female servant, thus the title is The Handmaid's Tale. Woven like a quilt, that was.

So, I have some experience with the dystopian genre, I've read all the dystopian novels that are esteemed as classics by most. Those being Fahrenheit 451 (1953), Brave New World (1932), and 1984 (1949). All of those books I enjoyed immensely and with the genre it is always fascinating reading into what their respective philosophy might be. So, I went into The Handmaid's Tale with that in mind … well, it wouldn't be a dystopian novel if I disagreed with some of the ideas.

One of the advantages of reading modern literature is that you can understand the context and the espoused views easier than you can with classic fiction. Like in the classic, Brave New World, where it depicts a hedonistic (meaning the ultimate goal is to indulge in the senses such as drugs and sex) society that indoctrinates all citizens at birth. I really don't know where the author, Aldous Huxley, could've been coming from when he created such a society. I guess maybe people advocating for repealing the Prohibition Act may have had an influence on him, but that is the best I could do. Here I understand where Margaret Atwood was coming from. There was a revival in conservative values at the time and people were denouncing the ongoing sexual revolution and feminism in general.



For being made in 1985, the main theme of the novel, women under control in a patriarchal society, isn't as powerful as I thought it would be, however. With other dystopian novels, I usually see the society presented as what could be ours through a distorted mirror of the present. But I'm sorry to all the impassioned readers and supporters of the book, I have a tough time seeing society develop into the theocratic system described. You could say that's because you are a guy Alex, you just don't understand the female side of things. You got me, I guess, but at the same time they are forcing women into the constricting roles of this new system, they are taking away men's freedoms, from their current relationships, from their jobs, from all the comforts of modern society. Why wouldn't they protest this, I ask. And I never received an answer, the best explanation the author gives me is that their freedoms were gone before they could react to it. "The newspaper stories were like dreams to us, bad dreams dreamt by others. How awful, we would say, and they were, but they were awful without being believable." Heck, Atwood just does away with all African-Americans in a couple lines in the story and that's it. It feels like an editor pointed out a plot hole and she didn't want to deal with themes of race, so she just did a real quick patch-up job.

Nowadays, the minority would be so small in support of the society presented that, although the back of the book asks, "In the world of the near future, who will control women's bodies?" I can't help but think the book's argument is a bit outdated, women have made massive steps towards equality since then and I can't see all the progress being reversed by a particular group of people even if the argument is made currently referring to the presidency.

Women dress up as characters from The Handmaid's Tale to protest Vice President Pence. Therefore, you might see signs referencing the book or just signs saying "Abort VP Pence."

Protesters referencing abortion being restricted in some states in the U.S.

Alas, I'm getting too opinionated here, but with books rooted strongly in politics, I think that will inevitably happen when addressing the subjects especially with it being more relevant than say, my last book Dracula, its political belief being Western European countries forcing their society upon Eastern Europeans. When I say relevant, this is what I am typically referring to, this book experienced a resurgence when Trump was elected, even a TV show was made just recently in 2017 on The Handmaid's Tale.

I could've compared the book to the show, but it feels wasteful when I just watch TV for hours. Maybe it's good, I don't know. I hear they have black actors in some of the roles, but it doesn't change much.

The book was a refreshing change than my past classics, however. It's an enjoyable feeling actually being engaged in the environment and story presented and it is its own experience and can't be replaced with simply reading a summary from Sparknotes. In 1984, Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451, this was the case when reading those novels and it's the same here. With Dracula and The Divine Comedy, I couldn't help but feel that I would've received the same experience if I just read a chapter by chapter summary of the books. In The Handmaid's Tale, it begins with the dystopian society already progressed with the main character Offred  (Offred, get it? She subverts what is expected of her in the red gown) in a depressed situation and you want to know how it came to this, what's her background. Atwood answers all through flashbacks and discussions Offred covertly has with other characters in the book. It's well organized, feeling like an authentic journal coming from the protagonist, and it's not outlandish in how it is written, which is what I was looking forward to when reading this book, cleansing my palate of some of the classic books' prose. It's straightforward, doesn't try to be pretentious, except when it acts like this could happen to the U.S., and answers every question that you may have, making it a satisfying read.

The exception to that being the ending ... it was unfortunately disappointing. I was expecting something emotionally powerful that will remain with you and at the end make you contemplate, "could this happen to us?", or "is there really no path of recovery from that point forward?". I remember when I read 1984 (I won't spoil it as I know Kari is reading it currently and it will probably weaken your experience of the book if you plan to read it someday) that I was in a melancholy state after reading its ends, thinking:is there any way to avoid this? The answer lies with Orwell's original purpose in creating 1984, not allowing totalitarianism to continue and develop. Nevertheless, I am going to spoil The Handmaid's Tale. It is what I was expecting when reading the book, it doesn't mean that the ending can't be good although. Brave New World was what I expected, but the ending I found to be so much more powerful than I expected. It ends with her being captured by what looks the all-seeing Eye, the omnipresent government of Gilead, but her secret sexual partner says they're with him and she'll see freedom. Thus, it leaves us uncertain as to her fate. According to Offred, she'll be happy with whatever "new beginning" she experiences; either she receives death out of her intolerable life or she actually will escape the country and be free. It's a sound ending, not top ten material, but still, I appreciate it. 

 

Wait just a second Margaret Atwood, what are these twenty pages after the ending of our protagonist's story? Are you telling me that instead of strengthening your message by ending there with an air of uncertainty, you instead decide to resolve the story and then some? Not following the format of the book, there is a section titled "Historical Notes on The Handmaid's Tale." When I saw this I thought it was just a postscript from the author, but apparently, it is a transcript of a lecture discussing and presenting their thoughts on an audio recording of The Handmaid's Tale in the year 2195. The recording which was illegal in Gilead, Offred managed to do at some point in her journey to freedom. I do not understand why the author would want to go this route at the end. Maybe she instead wants her final ending point to be don't make assumptions which is what Atwood was doing a commentary with the speaker in the lecture I believe. But why? That theme wasn't even explored in any other part of this book.  If you have read this book, and I know a couple people have in our class, I would welcome your explanation and interpretation of this ending, because, at the moment, I don't get it.

Altogether, my experience with The Handmaid's Tale has been a positive one even if I've been overly critical of the book. Perhaps that's because I gauged this book on the impact 1984, Brave New World, and Fahrenheit 451  had on me. Perhaps I viewed those books through rose-tinted glasses. But the difference still remains I don't think my first-time reading experience of The Handmaid's Tale was as memorable as a journey as the others. For it being more modern than its counterparts, I feel like it is more dated. With classics, I feel like I always have an excuse for something repugnant or obstinate about the work. I give them the benefit of the doubt; it was a different time, I'll say. What can I say excusing a book made in 1985? Oh well, I'll say, maybe it wasn't for me. Ergo, that's the end of this blog for week 5. I would recommend this book for people who are a feminist and desire to read some literature surrounding that cause. Otherwise, read the other dystopian novels mentioned in this blog, then, if you are craving more, read The Handmaid's Tale.

If commenting, ask me about the novel's place in high school. The book used to be read in Modern Literature classes at CCDHS (how I got my book).  I wrote a decent paragraph on it, but cut it because it didn't relate to the focus of the blog.

My Own Little Horror Story

You would think Google Docs and Blogger would work well together. To my dismay, it doesn't. It's astounding how much your document gets messed up from simply copying and pasting to Blogger from Google Docs. All the margins were gone so words would keep on going completely off the page, all the pictures were broken, and just selecting text would make the whole page shift for some reason. It's just a mess really. Since I typed it out on Docs, I'll just post the link for the page here. 

Halloween Spooktacular

This is no cheaty tactic I assure you.

An Epic: The Divine Comedy

I did not like this book.

Kixbait, as it is called, is something unrelated to the material at hand, but is injected to the forefront of the blog to get views.

Let me think up of a colorful analogy to explain my experience with The Divine Comedy . . . you ever had Kix? It's a cereal with no artificial flavors, no colors, no preservatives, and nothing to celebrate.

The first bite is not bad, it's no Captain Crunch, but it has a certain taste that you appreciate. That was the first book for me, the best known book in The Divine Comedy, The Inferno.  It was entertaining to see what the author of the book, Dante Alighieri, would create as we plunged into the depths of hell. The catch was that every canto (think of it as a chapter) often there would be a lengthy discourse that took away from the engagement the journey brought.

Second Bite: Oh regrets, why did you decide to have Kix, when you could have had Captain Crunch. The second book, The Purgatorio, I still found myself engaged with, but the journey seems to be taking a back seat to discourses and Dante wanting to espouse his personal beliefs more directly instead of through the medium of a story. Again some of the concepts are still entertaining though.

Third bite: It's cardboard, you are eating cardboard, but you have to finish it because your mom won't allow you to throw soggy cereal away. The third book, The Paradisio, was a struggle. The imagery was so much that I just had to read it and give up trying to envision it. For example, what am I supposed to imagine when there are hymns raised in harmonies that are unknown except to heaven itself? There was none of the original fun the last two books had as I could barely imagine what was going on even with a synopsis at the start of each canto. But I was the mom in that scenario and I said to myself I would finish it and write a focused non-review blog post on the book, so, here I am.

Due to my ambivalence on the book, I figured it would be best to relate The Divine Comedy to what we learned of in class as well as walk you through the journey taken in the book, as the book is widely referenced in culture and it'll probably serve as good background knowledge if any of you haven't read it. As a note, I will be primarily focused on the Inferno because it works better in terms of an epic and you probably don't want to read a blog post that will take you twenty minutes to finish.

Dante led by Charon crossing the river Styx with Virgil (an ancient Roman poet who Dante likes), his guide, by his side. Get used to the elaborate allusions that will be impossible to recognize without notes when reading the Divine Comedy.

Inferno begins with Dante (the author portrays himself as the protagonist) finding himself in a dark wood of error. It is the Easter season, a season of rebirth and Dante encounters Virgil, who explains that he is to lead Dante away from his errors. Dante will begin his descent through hell, then trek up Mount Purgatory,leave Virgil , and then ascend through the heavens. (The book does seem pretty cool at first glance.)

Unlike most epics, the hero is not an outstanding or legendary individual, there is nothing special about Dante at the time he was just a 35-year-old man who wrote a couple books prior. Nothing too remarkable except that he wrote in the Italian vernacular, which as we've learned in class was unconventional in the middle ages where people typically wrote in Latin, by no means does that make him a distinguished character however. 

The book does follow the wide expanse that epics are typified by though, the setting is of monumental proportions. Dante's depiction of hell is much more grander than it had to be. His depiction of hell is separated into nine circles with each circle progressing into more and more egregious acts. This is where you might have some experience with The Divine Comedy. Dante's portrayal of what hell has influenced how it is

typically depicted in culture and religion, and begins with something that is easy to understand for readers like me.

So Dante, the character, begins his journey through the gates of hell and in that vestibule he meets the first class of people: the opportunists. It's here where the book displays why it is recognized as one of the greatest books of the Middle Ages: the punishments. Woo, are they  fun and well done, it's a shame that there was really no such thing as that in The Paradisio because then there would have been something redeemable with that bowl of metaphorical Kix. With this in mind, let's look at who the opportunists are. They are the souls in life who never pursued evil, but also never pursued good, instead they only lived for themselves. Because of this, they are essentially in the foyer to hell. There the opportunists' punishment is, quoting Canto III's synopsis here because it does a much better job than I can describe it, "They race round and round, pursuing a wavering banner that runs forever before them through the through the dirty air; and as they run they are pursued by swarm of wasp and hornets who sting them and produce a constant flow of blood and putrid matter which trickles down the bodies of the sinners and is feasted upon by loathsome worms and maggots who coat the ground."  Isn't it gruesome!

Each punishment is a symbolic retribution for the past sinner's actions, eye-for-an-eye style. Following typical traits of an epic, it starts with themes that will stay prominent throughout the work. Here we see Dante's theme displaying God's perfect justice. As the opportunists took no sides, they are given no place in hell or heaven. As they constantly pursued whatever proved to be to their advantage for the current time, they are now pursuing an ever-shifting banner in the afterlife. As their own guilty conscience pursued them, they are pursued by pestilent swarms of wasps and hornets. According to a sign in this canto, hell exists to punish sin, and the punishments testify to the perfect justice that is given.

Just a cool illustration, not much relevance

While this made my experience with the epic better, another trait characteristic of epics made it worse. Long formal discourses, speeches, and diatribes are given almost every single canto. It can be done by Dante's guide, a guardian of a circle of hell, or one of the participants of hell. Let me take you to the third round of the seventh circle. It's at a "great plain of burning sand" where there are "flames raining from the sky to fall still unextinguished." Enough said there, that's awesome. But then Dante visits the inhabitants and they explain their lineage to Dante. Begging him to keep themselves in his memory, distracting from the amazing environment. It adds to the themes in most cases, but, as originally mentioned, it is done ad nauseam where it quickly becomes an annoyance even in the middle of the first book.   

Lastly, one of the most prominent traits is an epic elucidating the social and cultural conventions. In Beowulf, it was, uh, well people's love of wine and glory, and passion. In The Inferno especially, you can see the morals and the ethics of the time reflected through how it is organized. For example, why is murder viewed as belonging in the seventh circle, while accepting a bribe belongs to the more abhorrent eight circle. Well in the middle ages, people's ethics were based on strict church doctrine. Dante views harmony here on Earth as less important than God's will in heaven. Fraud therefore is viewed as the greater evil.

Given these points, I hope I did what I kind of originally intended to do reinforce what we learned in the class as well as maybe let you learn of The Divine Comedy so that way you will never have to slog through it. Or maybe this will encourage you to make the attempt as if you are prospectively looking at anything related to middle ages literature you will probably read this.

*NEW* Meta-Blog™: I worked myself in a hole with this blog. My angle restricted me to a point where I began writing it like an essay, unfortunate tidings for me, I may come back to rework this because I am left unsatisfied with how I wrote it. (Although right now it's pretty late . . . fun tip, you can modify the time to make it look better for when you published your blog, I'm setting this to 4:40 p.m) There was so much to cover that I didn't know how to surmount it all. Learning experience, I guess. It's decent, full of content, but it doesn't satiate that blog criteria with how I want to write it. It was fun, sure, but I just wanted to vent my grievances and struggles with this book so much.  While at the same time, I had to attempt to at least keep my blog concise. I'll welcome your comments and criticisms although what's left unsaid is often more powerful than the latter . . . .

Pride and Prejudice VS. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies

 vs.

Pride and Prejudice is an engaging read that has left an indelible mark in the heart of millions by its satire, characters, prose, and flow. It follows the young Bennet sisters in early eighteenth-century England challenging social class, rejecting proposals from insensible men, and learning of their prejudices that they each hold. Ok, I admit it may not sound that entertaining to some, but how about this? THE SAME PLOT but with ZOMBIES IN IT. Yeah, as you already learned from my title and my past mentions, "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" is a thing.

Now the Bennet sisters are zombie killers, trained in China (kind of a ninja thing that goes on), and instead of lame sowing while having conversation, they are now polishing guns. My question is: who is this supposed to appeal to? Will readers of Pride and Prejudice like their Pride and Prejudice with all that zombies can bring? Will fans of the zombie genre take solace that this is the change the genre needed? In short, no. It had a budget of 25 million and proceeded to have a revenue of 16 million in the box office -- not the best for the movie that was already downtrodden with unanimously negative critic reviews. But perhaps the world was mistaken, and perhaps I, a recent reader and admirer of the book and not much else, can see if it deserved the reaction it underwent.

Let's examine plot first. In the book, its first line lets you know what you're getting into, a satire on upper class culture. "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of good fortune must be in want of a wife." The same goes with the movie, it's the style of Pride and Prejudice with zombies arbitrarily in it. "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains."  The similarities don't end there however, the movie follows every plot point of the book, every major point. Maybe I should hold off on disclosing my opinion until the end, but I must admit, that's kind of hilarious. There's a scene in in the book where Darcy proposes to the protagonist,  Elizabeth, and she can't believe it and denies him with little civility because he is viewed as a pride and ungenerous man by her. Darcy can't accept what he hears from her and walks out of the room downcast. The exact same scene exists in the book, but before Darcy exits you know what happens? Elizabeth kicks Darcy (trained zombie killer, remember) in a fit of rage right in the gut and sends him flying back to the other side of the room and then proceeds to throw books at him. The regular conversation doesn't stop there though, it's just that now Elizabeth is flailing a fire poker while Darcy can only dodge. It doesn't stop there though, Darcy retaliates and its a fire poker versus a mail opener. Scenes like that are hilarious in the absurdity of it all.

The addition of zombies surprisingly did not reduce any of the original book's plot, they just reworked the original book's plot to fit with their zombies.  Wickham, a character who was prominent in the third act of the book, still plays his part, stealing one of the Bennet sisters for personal gain. Originally it was to pay off outstanding debt by getting married, now it's to have a human to join in on the zombie aristocrats at the Church of St. Lazarus. I'll get to the zombie aristocrats later. So overall, I felt that the plot was just as its own as the book, each addition of zombies actually worked in the Pride and Prejudice context.

You would think the tone would be totally incongruous when jumping to a run-of-the-mill ball to a zombie attack. But it works! The tone in the book was never that cheery and the movie knows that and uses every moment in how it is organized to have the satirical and ironic tone of the original. It feels like the movie even adds to the commentary of the book in some areas. They have to have this one ball in the book. And in the movie the upper class has to have the ball, while the world dies around them. But the catch is, while the world of Pride and Prejudice feels realistic, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies doesn't. I know it may seem obvious, but I'm referring to the "zombies" themselves. They're not zombies. Let's pull out a zombie checklist to illustrate this.

• Non-communicative growling or howling -- no, zombie aristocrats can talk just as well as any human
• Semi-catatonic state -- no, zombie aristocrats are not mindless
• Unemotional -- no, zombie aristocrats clearly show cunning and joy
• They crave brains -- yes, it's they're only zombie characteristic

Zombie mom with zombie baby played a clever trick on the Bennets posing as a wrecked traveler at first to get their guard down. She then attacked. Her head got blown off by Elizabeth.

Listen: whoever made this, when you say zombies have zombies. Don't create cannibals. In the movie, being a zombie is more like you are a harbinger of Mono, than a decaying undead zombie. One of the plot twists injected right at the tip of the climax is that Wickham, the person who stole one of the Bennet sisters, was a zombie all along! How do we know this? There are patches of red skin on his stomach *gasp*, of course, a zombie! Although the zombie-slaying moments are awesomely choreographed and make you feel cool just watching them, a fan of the zombies genre would surely be disappointed by the inconsistency in what a zombie actually is.

"Sharknado"

Going into the book, my expectations were that I would enjoy it. My thoughts were that it is still popular 200 years later for a reason. It met my expectations, but didn't exceed because of a slow start and I never find a theme like love can surpass all bounds that poignant which was its ending theme. Going into the movie, I was expecting Syfy movie quality and all that comes with it, hence the shark.
What I ended up with movie that I found enjoyable, that did not destroy the original source material, and instead added on to it with out producing a jarring effect in tone. Did I enjoy it as much as the book, no way, but it was way better than it had to be and that's impressive on its own. I would recommend "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" to anyone who liked the book and is looking for some entertainment. Anybody else, however, it's not really worth your time unless you just want to be mindlessly entertained.

My First and Last Ramble

As a reminder: I'm reading books. I leave it vague but, in general, the classics. Maybe not the most entertaining classics, but the types that you will hear mentioned over and over again in How to Read Literature Like a Professor. Accompanying each book I read will be a blog focusing on a certain aspect of the book, it will not be just it reviewing the difficulty of the read or reviewing it, that will be eventually tired out and even I wouldn't want to read it. Instead, this will keep it fresh and focused.

For example, I'm opening with Pride and Prejudice as my first book and instead of reviewing it I'm comparing it to the movie based on the book Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. I'm a little bit out of my zone with my movie part, but I hope I can bring some interesting commentary between the two. One thing left unplanned for my project is how to attain that movie. I was planning on getting it from the library, and although there are five copies in Kalispell, the movie's not in the Miles City Library. I could probably get it from the $3 bargain bin at Walmart, but more than likely I'll just pirate it from online. Update: Yep, found it on this site so you can watch along with me, just watch out for viruses. https://www3.fmovies.to/film/pride-and-prejudice-and-zombies.x0z8/88lrpy

The only other thing I am left uncertain on is my reading choice is for my designated Modern Lit Week where I read a popular modern book that isn't part of any literary canon. I was planning on reading Dan Brown's Lost Symbol but that's only because we have the book and this amusing satire: \https://www.datalounge.com/thread/12773016-hilarious-parody-of-renowned-author-dan-brown-in-the-telegraph. So, if you have any suggestions comment them. I'm up for anything that week; sports, adventure, sci-fi, fantasy, whatever genre John Green is, and romance, as long as it's not on the erotic. For that week it will just be a basic review of the book with no attention given to any aspect of it or the blogging prose.
 
I suppose I have a little experience in the blog style in the past a way back. I used to play this pay-to-win game The Simpsons Tapped Out and I was addicted to it. Hence I partook in a blog with likewise addicts mainly for the discussions, reviews of certain purchases, and individual showcases.

It was an enjoyable time, but like all mobile games I got tired of it and deemed it a waste of my time. The blog's still going strong with daily posts on the six-and-a-half-year-old mobile game somehow. It was written basic enough with nothing too remarkable, however, it always had a  cheerfulness and passion in how it was written that made me read nearly every post. Plans are for my project to put as much emphasis on the writing aspect of it -- the blogging aspect of it -- as the reading aspect of my project. So I hope can create an entertaining, impassioned, blog posts that aren't too dry and are focused.