wisewoman's 50+!

ChocolateMuse has convinced me to try this, so here goes! I read far more than 50 books per year, but you guys won't kick me out for that, will you? :)

My latest read — which is actually a reread, and that I have a few more pages to finish — is Robin McKinley's The Blue Sword. Absolutely wonderful fantasy, strong in every way. My review:

The Blue Sword is one of my ultimate comfort reads, the rare sort of novel that you first encounter in your teens that only gets better every time you revisit it. Of Robin McKinley's fine body of work, this novel is arguably one of the best, and proves her place as one of the best fantasy authors writing today.

A young woman named Harry — short for her hated name, Angharad — has come to the border town of Istan in Damar, a possession of the Homeland crown, as a charity case. Her brother is a subaltern in Her Majesty's army, and when their father died he was left with an entailed estate and an unmarried sister on his hands. Harry is extremely tall and awkward, lacking the beauty that might have made her position easier. Though Lady Amelia and Sir Charles are kindness itself to Harry, her real comfort in her new life is derived from a secret joy in the harsh, beautiful desert. Little does she know that she is about to involuntarily make its acquaintance on much closer terms — and join a desperate attempt to save Damar from the onrush of the demonic Northern army.

What a brilliant idea, to model a fantasy world from life during historical British imperialist rule. "Homeland" is very similar to England, and its characters are properly British in their ideas and manners. Damar's desert culture provides a lovely backdrop for the action of the story, and becomes more than that over the course of the story. It is almost a character in its own right, and forms a large part of the characters' motivations. This is definitely a fantasy novel to read for its world-building.

The characters are wonderful. Harry is fascinating because she is very observant and stubborn, though she tries to meet the expectations of those around her. Her wry sense of humor makes the events of the story feel believable, and she is a good judge of character. But we also get to see her insecurities and fears, which make her accessible and well rounded. I love the snippets of magic and history that we get, that are later explained in The Hero and the Crown. Corlath is also well written, and of course Tsornin and Mathin and the others all have distinct personalities conveyed well in a few words.

McKinley's economy of language is so precise and tight. Every word adds something meaningful to the story, lets us in a little closer to what is happening both externally and within the characters. This isn't always the case with her work — the denouéments of several of her novels are so wildly descriptive and powerful that they are sometimes unclear as to what is actually taking place — but this doesn't happen here. The end of the story is as satisfying as the language in which it is told. And as I was rereading this time, I couldn't help but wish for a really faithful film adaptation of this story. It would amazing onscreen if it were done well, if the actors could convey all the unspoken undercurrents in the relationships.

With its tight plot, compelling characters, authentic cultures, and deft writing, The Blue Sword is a wonderful example of top-notch fantasy writing. It's one of my all-time favorite books, and I can't recommend it highly enough.

(Re)read 9/13/09-9/14/09

Hi Wisewoman!

I will welcome you the the 50-book challenge, though I myself have been a terrible participant. No, no one will here say a word if you read beyond 50, especially not if you continue to write such delicious reviews!

Sometime, before the end of the year, my "compulsion to complete" will kick in and I will update my thread. In the meantime, I've starred your list and look forward to reading about your progress. See you here or over at the Salon (where I need to get crackin' on Master and Margarita).

Teresa

Woohoo!!! *loud cheering* I'm so glad to see you on here wisewoman!

Echoing what Theresa says about your delicious reviews - that's why I wanted you to have a thread where they could all be in one place that I can star and keep track of.

And The Blue Sword is one of those books I would have passed over if I hadn't read your review, but it has now been added to my wishlist.

Thanks so much, and a thousand welcomes!

=) Rena

Thanks guys; you're sweet *hugs*

Chocolate, do let me know when you read The Blue Sword. It's fantastic.

I suppose I should update with what I'm reading now! I'm a couple chapters into Prayer: Does it Really Make Any Difference? by Philip Yancey, and I'm slightly annoyed by some of his theology. Also, the chapters so far have lots of nice little ideas in them, but they are very scattery. The whole thing feels so unfocused so far... ironic, considering that the book is about prayer! I'll probably be in this one for awhile.

I'm also reading The Wyvern Mystery by J. Sheridan Le Fanu. I am finding it a bit hard to get through, despite its Gothic ghostiness and melodrama. I'm just not identifying with any of the characters. I'm going to push through and finish it, but I much prefer Wilkie Collins' particular brand of stagey suspense!

Aaaaaaaaand today is Bilbo's and Frodo's birthday, which I celebrate by rereading The Lord of the Rings every year. This year I'm going to be listening to the unabridged audiobook read by Rob Inglis, courtesy of my library. Can't wait! :)

I tried Lord of the Rings about three years ago - tried really hard, and pushed through all the way to about the first quarter of Return of the King. But I just could not get into it. It just seemed to me to be one random thing happening after another, and Tolkien seemed to be going, "hey, look, isn't this cool? Here's a large man who's actually part tree! And wow, this is scary huh, here's an extremely large hobbit-eating spider! What shall I come up with next...?"

However, I re-read The Last Battle by CS Lewis last night and got thinking that maybe I should try Lord of the Rings again. What is it about the book you love, WW? If you give me a 'this is why I love it' guide, maybe that'll give me the correct mindset to approach it with. I always feel like I'm missing out on some essential magic of life by not loving Tolkien. :(

Oh dear; where to start?

Yes, the first several chapters meander a bit. Tolkien was still figuring out where his story was going. I love those parts though. They lay the basis for the hobbits' culture and tell us about them as characters. And there is so much humor there! "The Gaffer was recognized as the leading authority on potatoes by everyone in the neighborhood — including himself." Heehee.

But you DID persevere much farther than that. Hmm.

Perhaps it seems that everything happening was random, but it isn't. The story splits up three different ways and yet each set of characters are working toward the same goal. Each has a part to play, and even insignificant jobs turn out to be essential. Merry sneaks along with Eowyn to battle and look what a huge part he plays!

Tolkien wasn't just making up the world as he went along. He actually wrote a lot of the history of Middle-earth in his late teens and early twenties. Granted, The Lord of the Rings came much later in life, but the world had already been in his head for decades at that point.

Maybe if you read it with a scholarly mindset you might enjoy it more. I wrote my honors thesis on the medieval and modern themes in Middle-earth, and how Tolkien wove them together seamlessly. You have extremely medieval characters like Aragorn (the perfect king) interacting with modern characters like Frodo (plagued with self-doubt and addicted). And there are others that bridge the gap between the two poles: Gandalf's wisdom is timeless and benefits both Aragorn and Frodo. He even has wisdom about Gollum, the most modern character in the story (Gollum is, of course, a junkie). Aragorn can make no headway with Gollum; naturally not, as they simply cannot understand one another (Aragorn says "nothing more did I get from his mouth but the marks of his teeth").

There is also a fascinating progression in the main female characters of LOTR. We start with Arwen, the distant, beautiful, medieval princess — to Galadriel, who is a type of Virgin Mary and thus has relevance to characters from either worldview — and finally to Eowyn, who is discontented with the role assigned to her as a woman and defies it in a very modern way. Medieval – Bridge – Modern. Fascinating!

Tolkien was a big medievalist. He didn't like "progress" and mechanical contraptions, and this shows with the industrial setting of Saruman's Tower of Orthanc (and later by the miller selling out his mill and becoming a servant where once he was master). And yet Tolkien doesn't write off the modern world altogether. Two modern characters — Frodo and Gollum — between them manage to actually destroy the Ring, despite how flawed they are.

And Sam, Sam... how can you not love him?? Many say that he is really the hero of the story. Faithful, humble, resolute, he calls himself "nowt but a ninnyhammer" and yet without him, the Quest would have undoubtedly failed.

Some people complain about Tolkien's writing style. I don't understand what's wrong with it. Certain passages are downright amazing and I always read and reread them for the elegant perfection of their descriptions. One example is the shiver-worthy description of Shelob. I don't mean that he makes her super creepy (though he does); it's more the utter calm authority and almost the poetry of how he tells her history. I can see it so clearly in my mind's eye. I can quote it for you when I'm home and have my book with me. And there are many other passages that are just gorgeously written too.

(Oh, and Shelob wasn't a random invention. Her ancestors had a part to play in The Silmarillion, sucking the life from the tree of life symbol; really interesting stuff, and dating from the earliest years of Tolkien's Middle-earth imaginings.)

And quotable lines! The last time I read it, I underlined all my favorite lines and passages. I should thumb through that copy and quote some of my favorites here.

I do think you are missing out big-time by not enjoying Tolkien, but enjoyment can't be forced. If it doesn't speak to you, it doesn't speak to you, and that's that.

Have you seen the movies? Have you ever looked at any artwork by Alan Lee or John Howe? I just love the tragedy and the Celtic beauty of Middle-earth... shown to us by characters we can identify with, the hobbits. Maybe give it another try one of these days. I would love to hear your second thoughts :)

The Wyvern Mystery by J. Sheridan Le Fanu

I had high hopes for J. Sheridan Le Fanu's The Wyvern Mystery. I heard of him in Dorothy Sayers' Gaudy Night; her character Harriet Vane is doing research on him and compares him favorably with one of my favorite Victorian sensationalist authors, Wilkie Collins. So of course I wanted to find out if I'd been missing anything. It turns out I really hadn't been. (Be warned: there are spoilers in this review.)

Oh, it's Gothic-y and ghost-y. Yes, it's tragic and stagily dramatic. Yes, people die and there are dark secrets galore. So why couldn't I settle in and enjoy it?

Firstly, I wasn't a big fan of Le Fanu's style. He switches between the past and present tenses for no apparent reason and the writing feels sloppy. He also uses contractions in the narrative, which is something I can't get used to in a "classic" work.

Secondly, the plot just didn't grab me. Young Alice Maybell is the ward of the old lord of Wyvern, Lord Fairfield, who is old enough to be her grandfather — and who wants to marry her. She runs away and marries his son Charles, an indolent but not wholly despicable man who is in severe financial difficulties. They remove to Carwell Grange, the property left to Charles by his mother. There Alice sees a vision that bodes ill to the Fairfield brides... and of course it starts coming true almost immediately. Tragedies of various kinds ensue, and sadly I didn't care enough about any of the characters to really be engaged with their struggles.

Not only that, but toward the end of the book Le Fanu introduces new characters in a new setting and completely drops the ones we'd been following for the first 200 pages. There were only a few pages left and I was starting to feel desperate. How will we ever wrap this up in time?

I did have a complaint about Bertha, the tall, blind, foul Dutchwoman. When Wilkie Collins does a foreign character, he does it right. The character's speech is heavily accented (yet still quite readable), and he/she displays an otherness that is very distinctive. Le Fanu's Bertha has the potential to be wonderfully creepy, but he doesn't make enough use of her. Her eventual death is so anti-climactic for such an unusual personage. And did he intentionally name her Bertha, in reference to Charlotte Bronte's mad-wife character Bertha in Jane Eyre? The Wyvern Mystery was published in 1869, 22 years after Bronte's famous novel. I wonder.

Another weakness in the story was that Le Fanu never explains how it was possible that there should be any ambiguity about whether or not Charles was married to Bertha. What kind of arrangement would lead to the marriage being questionable? Either you're married or you aren't. Divorce is never mentioned, so it wasn't that. It just doesn't make sense.

I was also a bit disappointed in the way the story didn't have much to do with the title. It's a nice title; "Wyvern" has such craggy edges to it and it would have been nice if the ill luck and hot blood of the Fairfields was linked to the symbol of their estate, the wyvern. Certainly their love of gold and fiery tempers were dragonish enough to warrant a comparison.

There were a couple good things. I enjoyed trying to figure out Harry throughout the book. I think there is a little ambiguity still about just how much of a villain he is. Yes, he wants the estate despite all his protestations to the contrary. He is a liar and a conniver. He switches the baby heir with a sick one from a workhouse, which dies according to plan. The real baby is sent to live in the country, with Harry pretending that it was his own natural son. Thankfully he has time before he dies to confess what he had done (another point in his favor that he would even confess it). But still, it was very dastardly. In some ways this story felt like Silas Marner gone wrong.

I have to confess that if I were to see another Le Fanu book at a library booksale, I would probably snatch it up in hopes that it would be better than this one. It had all the ingredients I usually enjoy; there was just something wrong with the way it was baked.

Read 9/8/09–9/27/09

Next up is probably Wilkie Collins' Legacy of Cain.

Fantastic analysis of LOTR, wisewoman! I read the trilogy a couple of years ago and at first, I wasn't sure I'd make it through the whole thing but by the end, I loved it. I have never really been able to articulate exactly why but one of the factors is that I loved how complete Middle-Earth felt - there were maps, several languages, all these different cultures, I couldn't believe the amount of thought that Tolkien put into it. So, I think you have a very good point about trying a scholarly approach to it. But I think there is also a lot of pleasure to be gained from just losing yourself in Middle-Earth and all of it's characters, it's (for the most part) delightful.

Thank you SO much for that wonderful analysis, wisewoman! You have actually made me want to try again, which is a huge first step. I shall print out your lovely analysis and keep it with me while I read it.

I'm in the middle of two other books at the moment (though have finally finished Vanity Fair!) but I'm feeling almost like I can't wait to start LOTR now, thanks to you! I think what I might try to do is not have any expectations of how fast I want to finish it, and just dabble in it whenever I get a chance - I understand now (and may not have before) that it's not the kind of book you read because you have to find out what happens at the end, it's the kind you read to lose yourself in with a luxurious sense of taking your time, like spacespuds says above. So I'll try that, and see how I go...

Thanks again - the things you've written about LOTR prove again that our minds work in the same way. I hope you don't mind me babbling away on your thread, I feel like I'm in a friend's kitchen with a nice cuppa :-)

*blushes* I'm really glad my rambling, disorganized thoughts on LOTR made any sense whatsoever to you guys!

I think it's interesting, Rena, that you reread The Last Battle and thought of The Lord of the Rings. We just watched ALL the movies this past weekend with some friends, and one thing I really noticed was the sense of beautiful tragedy in Middle-earth's history, and that we get a taste of in Lewis' final Chronicle. It's almost as if the things of grace are always doomed, always failing to quite hold back the tide of evil — but they are made so precious through the fragility of their existence. Elrond and Galadriel and the other older Elves have seen so much slaughter and desecration, and they carry those memories with them forever... but the ugliness only makes the beauty keener. I get the feeling that the high Celtic beauty of their culture would not have the resonance and power it does without the sense of constantly impending destruction, and the memory of previous deaths.

You're wise to take it at a leisurely pace. I actually can't remember a time when I did not know the story of LOTR; as a teen I remember borrowing the paperbacks from the library to reread whenever I felt I really wanted some "meat" and my usual YA diet wasn't quite up to snuff. I don't remember ever not knowing what happened. Maybe that's why I was always able to fall into the story without getting frustrated with the length and detail of it.

I need to remember to quote some of my favorite parts here when I'm home...

Babble all you want here; I love reading your thoughts and am so happy to have found (and been found by) a kindred spirit. And if you are ever in the States, we must make that kitchen cuppa a reality. Hugs! :)

I started Wilkie Collins' Legacy of Cain last night. It's going to be a good one, I think. I love how Collins takes a social/philosophical issue and builds his story around it. In this case, it's the age-old question of nature versus nurture. It will be fascinating to see which side is vindicated by the events of the story — or if Collins lands somewhere in the middle, leaving the reader to interpret according to his wont.

Well, I started LOTR last night! I had to plough through the dry history of hobbits at the start - I can see how I'd love reading it if I already loved the book, but since I don't (yet!!) I wasn't thrilled. But once I started the actual story, well, I'm reasonably enjoying it so far. Haven't got far, got up to Bilbo not wanting to hand the ring over to Gandalf before leaving, at midnight last night, then went into sleep-deprivation mode and had to stop.

I looked up Legacy of Cain - looks interesting, and I'm excited now, because I didn't know Wilkie Collins had written so many books! I thought there was only The Woman in White, Armadale and The Moonstone! Wow, there are so many more!

Thanks Amy, and if you're ever in the Antipodes, same goes with my kitchen :)

Like you Wilkie Collins is one of my favorite authors and I do like stories with a touch of supernatural in them. So, I've always wanted to read something by J. Sheridan Le Fanu. But after reading your review I'm apprehensive. It's strange to think that another one of my favorite authors Richard Brinsley Sheridan and J. Sheridan Le Fanu are related. Richard Sheridan wrote hilarious but biting satirical dramas while Le Fanu wrote gothic horror.

It might have just been the Le Fanu title I picked up, Porua. It was the only one available at PaperBackSwap by him, so maybe it's one of his weaker ones — ?

I finished and reviewed Legacy of Cain: http://www.librarything.com/review/37401214. And yes, Collins wrote almost 30 novels, which makes me very happy because I love his stuff. It reminds me of why I read: to get lost in a story, to be drawn into the lives of the characters, and to savor good writing. Collins is definitely a comfort read for me. I'm still trying to collect all his novels.

I haven't forgotten about you, Chocolate! LOTR quotes to come, and then also a review of George MacDonald's The Princess and the Goblin. I was so happy to actually get a few hours to read this weekend!

This is just a really quick sampling of my underlined passages in The Lord of the Rings. There are many, many more than this...

"I wakened Goldberry singing under window; but nought wakes hobbit-folk in the early morning." (p. 126)

"Tom's words laid bare the hearts of trees and their thoughts, which were often dark and strange, and filled with a hatred of things tha go free upon the earth, gnawing, biting, breaking, hacking, burning: destroyers and usurpers. It was not called the Old Forest without reason, for it was indeed ancient, a survivor of past forgotten woods; and in it there lived yet, ageing no quicker than the hills, the fathers of the fathers of trees, remembering times when they were lords." (p. 128)

"And it is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world. We should seek a final end of this menace, even if we do not hope to make one." (p. 260)

"And the Dwarf, hearing the names given in his own ancient tongue, looked up and met her eyes; and it seemd to him that he looked suddenly into the heart of an enemy and saw there love and understanding." (p. 347)

"'What did you blush for, Sam?' said Pippin. 'You soon broke down. Anyone would have thought you had a guilty conscience. I hope it was nothing worse than a wicked plot to steal one of my blankets.'" (p. 348)

"But do not despise the lore that has come down from distant years; for oft it may chance that old wives keep in memory word of things that once were needful for the wise to know." (p. 365)

"She shone like a window of glass upon a far hill in the westering sun, or as a remote lake seen from a mountain: a crystal fallen in the lap of the land. Then it seemed to Frodo that she lifted her arms in a final farewell, and far but piercing-clear on the following wind came the sound of her voice singing." (p. 368)

"He heard himself crying out, Never, never! Or was it: Verily I come, I come to you?... The two powers strove in him. For a moment, perfectly balanced between their piercing points, he writhed, tormented. Suddenly he was aware of himself again. Frodo, neither the Voice nor the Eye; free to choose, and with one remaining instant to do so." (p. 392)

"A strong place and wonderful was Isengard, and long it had been beautiful; and there great lords had dwelt, the wardens of Gondor upon the West, and wise men that watched the stars. But Saruman had slowly shaped it to his purposes, and made it better, as he thought being deceived — for all those arts and subtle devices, for which he forsook his former wisdom, and which he fondly imagined were his own, came but from Mordor; so that what he made was naught, only a little copy, a child's model or a slave's flattery, of that vast fortress, armoury, prison, furnace of great power, Barad-dur, the Dark Tower, which suffered no rival, and laughed at flattery, biding its time, secure in its pride and its immeasurable strength." (p. 542)

"Ithilien, the garden of Gondor now desolate kept still a dishevelled dryad loveliness." (p. 636)

"War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its switftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend." (p. 656)

"...the praise of the praiseworthy is above all rewards." (p. 667)

"...shadowy meads filled with pale white flowers. Luminous these were too, beautiful and yet horrible of shape, like the demented forms in an uneasy dream; and they gave forth a faint sickening charnel-smell; an odour of rottenness filled the air." (p. 689)

"'Why, even Gollum might be good in a tale, better than he is to have by you, anyway. And he used to like tales himself once, by his own account. I wonder if he thinks he's the hero or the villain?'" (p. 697)

"Then Pippin cried aloud, for the Tower of Ecthelion, standing high within the topmost wall, shone out against the sky, glimmering like a spike of pearl and silver, tall and fair and shapely, and its pinnacle glittered as if it were wrought of crystals; and white banners broke and fluttered from the battlements in the morning breeze, and high and far he heard a clear ringing as of silver trumpets." (p. 734-5)

Mmmmmm... *savors*

And here is my review for The Princess and the Goblin: http://www.librarything.com/review/14521354

Next up will be Sylvester by Georgette Heyer. I've been looking forward to this!

Great reviews, ww. I really must read some Collins! And apparently it's time for a MacDonald reread as well. I loved his stuff as a child, so 'twill be interesting to see how it holds up. The Princess and the Goblin was my favorite, but my dad has always loved At the Back of the North Wind best. Upon rereading it recently, he added it to his "Favorite Books" list on Facebook.

And I love the LotR quotes! I just finished Part/Book III, and can't wait to read more. I also skipped ahead and read all of "The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen" for the first time, and I think it may have become my favorite Tolkien passage. "But let us not be overthrown at the final test, who of old renounced the Shadow and the Ring. In sorrow we must go, but not in despair. Behold! we are not bound forever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory. Farewell!"

Welcome

I love LOTR, my mom read it to us (the whole family) in the 70s mostly in the evenings while camping. Even then I loved it so much I would steal the book and read way ahead and then listen to her read it again. I haven't re-read it in years. You've made me think I should put it onto my re-read list.

Thanks Nathan. I think I would have liked MacDonald better if I had read him younger. It will be interesting to see what you think of him now. You might like him just as much as ever! I can see the charm there; it just didn't charm me, somehow. I do plan on reading more of him eventually.

*sighs in bliss at the quote from The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen*

Alice443, thanks for stopping by my challenge thread! Yes, you should definitely reread LOTR. It's funny that you would steal the book and read ahead of the officially scheduled readings... I did the same thing when my mom would read to us! If you do reread, please let me know; I'd love to hear your thoughts on revisiting it after all those years.

I finished Sylvester yesterday; such fun. God bless Georgette Heyer for the sheer pleasure she gives her readers! Here's my review: http://www.librarything.com/review/34498640

Next up is probably The Octopus by Frank Norris, for a group read here on LT. I hear it's boring, and it really doesn't sound like something I'd normally be interested in, so I'm not even adding it to my catalog yet (it's a library book). I predict I will drop it, actually, but I thought I'd give it a try at least.

You're braver than I am. I looked through a few random pages of The Octopus online, said "blecccch," and decided I wouldn't be joining them. That period of American lit doesn't exactly get my motor running, anyway. Looks like December & Les Miserables is going to be my first group read with the Salon (I've gotten a jump on things and have been reading it for the past few weeks--I agree with you so far, it's wonderful).

Hello to both wisewoman and Medillia,

I couldn't imagine reading The Octopus either. I am looking forward to Les Miserables and the group read of Proust. I'll gladly put myself into your hands on that one Medillia.

Wisewoman, I'm with you on Collins, but I've never been that interested in LOTR. Reading your thoughts do make me think about it. I have the Hobbit. If I do consider a reading, should I begin there or just jump into LOTR?

My courage failed me today at lunch. Somehow I found plenty of other things to do BESIDES open The Octopus... not sure if I even will. It does look deadly boring.

Theresa, I suppose it depends on what you like. The Hobbit is much simpler and is written with that grandfatherly tone that people either love or hate. It's great fun and I do love it, but The Lord of the Rings is for adults, and all the little things that are hinted at in The Hobbit suddenly become a vast and sprawling history underlying that world.

If you enjoy Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia, you should like The Hobbit. It's certainly less of a commitment than LOTR, and LOTR does refer back to events in The Hobbit. Yes, all in all, I would start there if I were you. I envy you your first read... I can't remember the first time I read Tolkien. He was always a part of my reading consciousness, somehow.

It's unfortunate that Tolkien's work is often thought of as subpar literature, fit only for those who want to learn Elvish via a correspondence course. He has been much imitated and the imitators very rarely approach the creative integrity of Middle-earth... but his reputation suffers from theirs. Tolkien hasn't quite lost the stigma the "literati" gave him initially, but we're getting there :-)

I'm not a big fan of Narnia. Liked the The Magician's Nephew, Prince Caspian and the Voyage of the Dawn Treader well enough, the others not as much. Still, The Hobbit sits in my house and might get me started. Thanks and I'll let you know.

Edited to say I just pulled The Hobbit off my shelves and am finally adding it to my library. Might make a good holiday read, I think!

I've been away from the internet since last I wrote - thank you for the replies and those beautiful quotes. You no longer need to sell LoTR to me - I am committed and in love. I've just left Rivendell and am heading up the high pass - and I remember vaguely from last time that they get turned back and have to go through Moria. I can't wait :-)

And to reply to the profile page comment - I don't mind Sam's 'yokel-ness' now. He's got plenty of intelligence, just not much education. His dog-like devotion bothers me a little, but not enough to ruin anything. I'm starting to discover his love of all things beautiful, his innate gentleness, and his quick thinking in times of stress. I'm won over! The feudal way of looking at it helps too.

I'm thinking that maybe the different places move forward in time too, like the characters do as you say above. The Old Forest is quite Pagan, as is Tom Bombadil's country, with hints of a world's beginnings - an empty land, ruled by earth and water and trees. And then Rivendell, which is the next long resting place - kind of like a Golden Age, half mythical half medieval. A sort of Arthurian legendary world. I haven't got to the next place yet, and maybe the settings don't consistently get more modern. I'm very happily taking my time to find out!

Anyway, I definitely approached LoTR in the wrong way the first time, and thanks to your comments (which I keep on a piece of paper in the book and refer to from time to time) I have at last discovered the magic of Tolkien!

I love your quotes - one that stuck out to me while reading was (can't quote verbatim, but something like) "the rain turned the white path into milk, and it went frothing and bubbling down the hill to the river". Such imagery. *happy sigh*

On another note, it's cool that the upcoming group reads are on Les Miserables and Proust - both are books I've decided very recently that I want to read. I'll probably join in if I can. Yay, so many great books lie ahead of me! :)

LOTR is one of my all time favorites. Period. Glad you love it too, wisewoman! Great quotes BTW. :-)

"I wrote my honors thesis on the medieval and modern themes in Middle-earth, and how Tolkien wove them together seamlessly".

Hey wisewoman, any chance you might someday post your thesis here for our collective Middle-earthian edification? Seriously! I bet it would be a fascinating read, especially if it's anything like your reviews!

Okay, I think it's official. I haven't the moral courage to inflict The Octopus upon myself. Never mind the touchstone; it's wrong.

Theresa, please let me know what you think of the The Hobbit! I hope you enjoy it.

Lorena, I am still so overjoyed that you picked up LOTR again — and what's more, that you are enjoying it! It's a nice symmetry; it seems I've done for Tolkien with you what you did for Heyer with me! Long may the recommendations and revisitations continue.

Porua, do you remember the first time you read LOTR? I'm always interested to hear about other people's first experiences with Middle-earth, since I don't remember mine.

Enrique, thanks for stopping in! My thesis is 132 pages; are you sure you want to slog through it? I tried to warn the guy at church who wanted to read it, but he insisted, so I hit him with the whole thing. It's his own fault :-P

I noticed Bel Canto by Ann Patchett being highly praised on ChocolateMuse's profile page awhile back, so I picked up the next copy that came to hand and started it yesterday. So far it's quite good and is reminding me of Steven Galloway's The Cellist of Sarajevo which I read through the Early Reviewers program. Music is central in both stories of human violence and tragedy. I already love some of Patchett's observations, such as bitterness being a first cousin to the truth. I'm afraid we are setting up for a sad ending but it will be a good journey getting there, at least.

I finished Bel Canto last night and enjoyed it very much. But I think it's the sort of book that wows you when you first read it, but whose flaws only become more apparent after a little time away from it. I was originally planning on giving it four stars, but couldn't quite bring myself to it this morning. It gets three and a half: http://www.librarything.com/review/48855206

Next up is probably a much lighter book, Sherwood Smith's children's book Wren to the Rescue. I like to vary my reading! :)

I agree ENTIRELY about Bel Canto, in that it blows one away while reading it, and then, after a while, the flaws start occurring to one, and one starts wishing one didn't wave quite so many flags over it in the first place.

I also felt the same about the ending, didn't quite know what to think of it. Another great review from the Review Queen!

...by the way, when you say you "hit" this guy with your thesis, do you mean you actually...?? :P

Thanks Chocolate! I'm glad you waved a flag over Bel Canto, though; I probably would never have read it otherwise. I avoid most modern fiction unless it's specifically recommended, and I did enjoy the book.

And no, I didn't physically hit the man with my thesis. Having to read it was punishment enough, I thought :-P

I've been reading Wren to the Rescue and haven't really been enjoying it all that much. It has poor characterization, a predictable plotline, and little else. I might have enjoyed it as a young reader, but truly good children's books can be enjoyed by any age.

I really *was* going to finish it... I have about half left... but I was also planning a reread of Jane Eyre because another site I'm a part of is having a "special feature" on the Bronte sisters. I've been wanting to reread that for quite some time now, so this was the perfect excuse. When I got into bed last night and looked at the two books on my nightstand — Wren to the Rescue and Jane Eyre — I did not have the strength to make myself pick up Wren. I am but a weak mortal, after all. So Jane Eyre it was.

And I have fallen headfirst, wholly into love with this book again. I remember I liked it when I read it years ago, that I found the characters and story enthralling and Jane a fantastic narrator. But I did not remember what a spell it could cast, how powerful it is.

This is the kind of book I want to call off work in order to finish. I thought about staying up all night to read all the way through. I don't know how I am going to endure work today, or choir practice tonight, when I am just longing to get back to Thornfield. I went to bed way too late last night because I just wanted to keep reading. No doubt I will do the same tonight, and will be quite grumpy tomorrow!

I have no doubt that this rediscovery will vault Jane Eyre into my top ten novels of all time, probably my top five. As much as I adore books and reading, it's rare that one can grip me so profoundly. It reminds me of my first read of Les Misérables, when I moved through two weeks of my life in a kind of abstracted fog because of the brilliance of that book. I love being captured like this.

So does anyone know of any good film/TV adaptations?

I've not seen it myself (it's on my rental list), but the BBC adaptaion from a few years ago gets great reviews.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Jane-Eyre-BBC-Ruth-Wilson/dp/B000IJ7H2C/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UT...

I read Jane Eyre just a few months ago for the first time and was totally bowled over.

I liked your anlaysis of LOTR - I think the quality of Tolkien's writing is often overlooked, partly because the narrative sweeps the reader along so fast and partly because it's rather snobbily regarded by critics as belonging to the untouchable fantasy genre.

Talking of which, could you recommend any epic fantasy series to me while I wait (& wait & wait) for GRR Martin to finish A Dance with Dragons?

#29: What a coincidence! I was just talking about this on my Club Read thread. I've been rereading parts of & rewatching my favorite adaptation of Jane Eyre this week, because I'm stressed out.

My favorite is the 1983 adaptation with Timothy Dalton as Mr Rochester and Zelah Clarke as Jane Eyre. For me, Timothy Dalton is Mr Rochester. Zelah Clarke is good, though sometimes I think she is a little too reserved. A lot of dialogue taken directly from the book. It's long, something like five hours.

Second favorite is the 1973 adaptation with Sorcha Cusack and Michael Jayston. Another adaptation that's faithful to the book, and another long one. This one has its merits--I think the really romantic scenes are a bit more swoon-worthy than in the 1983 version. However, Cusack's Eyre was occasionally annoying--from the beginning with Mr Rochester, she's very forward and confident, and I'm not sure the woman put down her eyebrows for the entire movie. Jayston is good as Rochester, but not great.

Steer clear of the 2006 adaptation, for purists it's an awful thing. They've replaced Bronte's dialogue with horribly trite howlers, and unsurprisingly, they made it "sexier," they really "brought the passion to the forefront." Ugh.

Speaking of Les Mis, I put out a plea on my thread asking whether anyone had watched any good adaptations of it. I'll probably want to watch one (if there's a good one) after I finish the book.

jintster, thanks for stopping by! You're absolutely right about what Tolkien scholar Tom Shippey calls "the literati" and their unexplainable disdain for fantasy in general and Tolkien in particular.

I have a kind of humorous story about that. One of Tolkien's earliest and angriest critics was Catherine Stimpson. When I was researching my thesis I wanted to read her work. I had to request it via interlibrary loan, and there was only ONE copy in ALL the libraries in the entire state of Ohio. In her book she hates on Tolkien so virulently that a previous reader was moved to argue with her in the margins, which was hilarious. He/she even started scratching things out in the text to change the meaning to something positive about Middle-earth. The last sentence of the book (which unfortunately I don't remember verbatim) said something like, "This fad will wear out quickly; Frodo will not live." The person before me scratched out the "not" and added a few more choice comments underneath. It was great.

And what is so brilliant about the whole thing is that it's Stimpson's book that did not live... only one copy was to be found in all the libraries in Ohio. But Tolkien is everywhere :D

On to Jane Eyre... Medellia, that's so FUN that you happen to be reading it right now too! Another kindred spirit. Thank you both for the recommendations! I've put the 1983 version on hold at the library. I've heard both good and bad things about the 2006 BBC version, but Medellia's opinion (and a few of the reviews on Amazon that said "traditionalists" wouldn't like it) is enough to make me seek out others instead. I cannot stand when screenwriters sex up classic stories and have the effrontery to think their modern dialogue is an improvement on the original.

It's fascinating how the conversation is going over on my other site. I think my review is going to turn into what my Mansfield Park review did: a character defense. Mr. Rochester just gets no love! It might be the age group (a lot of the readers there are younger). His repentant speech at the end is probably the most moving of its kind that I've ever read (no, I'm not there yet in this reread, but I've seen it quoted recently online).

Medellia, how did I miss your thread? *stars immediately* I'll reply there about Les Mis adaptations.

jintster, about epic fantasy recommendations — have you ever read the Gormenghast books by Mervyn Peake? Some critics say it's even better than The Lord of the Rings... not an opinion I share, but I do love it. It's very, very different though. I reviewed it here if you want more info: http://www.librarything.com/review/14529186. There is also a BBC miniseries, but I recommend reading the book first. I liked the miniseries but it lacked the fire of Peake's astonishing prose. I don't know much about Peake, but one of the reviews there mentions that he visited the Inklings occasionally. It doesn't surprise me a bit!

Have you ever read the Attolia books by Megan Whalen Turner? Not exactly "epic," but some of the most satisfying fantasy I have ever read. They are, in order, The Thief, The Queen of Attolia, and The King of Attolia. TQA is my favorite, followed closely by TKA.

You could also try C. S. Lewis' Space Trilogy (Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, and That Hideous Strength). Amazing philosophical fantasy, and the last book especially gripped me with its chilling plot.

I have plenty more recommendations, but they can wait. See if you like any of these — I hope you do! :)

I hear great things about GRRM, but I don't want to start it until the series is finished. I'm like Inigo Montoya: "I hate waiting." :-P

I should see if my library has either the '73 or '83 JE to watch at some point, though generally the film quality of those old BBC miniseries turns me off a bit. I agree with you on '06, Medellia (we seem to be agreeing quite a bit on various threads at the moment, no?) though I do think it's worth watching once for the great Gothic atmosphere, Ruth Wilson's Jane, and some nice supporting performances. That said, between the pretty boy Rochester, the ouigi boards, and the near-sex scene, I don't know why fans hold it up as the "best" and "most accurate." But we should get off the topic of the overrated Sandy Welch before I get violent....

As an old movie fan, I do really, really like the 40s film with Orson Welles and Joan Fontaine. If you can deal with the Liam Neeson Les Mis, Amy, I think you could deal with this adaptation. It's not exactly purist-friendly, in that it cuts many subplots and creates one other, with a Dr. Rivers showing up (NOT Saint-Jean), and the childhood scenes are rather over the top, but Welles and Fontaine give an acting tour de force and it was so good that my mother neglected her laundry and sat through the whole thing, which she had not planned to do. Fontaine is probably too pretty for Jane, but her makeup is plain enough and the Blanche is gorgeous enough that it all works out believably.

Personally, I found the Zeferelli 90s film dull, except for Anna Paquin's excellent young Jane.

Phew ... I'm through.

You had asked me (eons ago) about the first time I had read LOTR. Well, frankly I don't remember much about that. But I do remember that I found it difficult to read the second part, The Two Towers. Not because it was boring or anything. It is just that when I read a book, I just cannot separate myself from the narrative. Thus Frodo and Sam's harrowing journey became my journey. At times I felt like I cannot go on anymore. But I persisted. And was amply rewarded for my efforts by The Return of the King. It was very, very satisfying and LOTR has since earned a place in my favorites list.

Thanks for the recommendations.

I have read the first Gormenghast but found it too gloomy - the beach is probably not the best environment for it.

May well check out the other two. Had no idea CS Lewis had written any sci-fi!

GRRM is great but you're quite right to wait until he's finished the series (if he ever does). The wait is interminable and of course you've forgotten the extremely complex plot by the time the next one comes out.

Amy, Jane Eyre has been in my top five for years. I LOVE LOVE that book. In fact, I've now officially read it too many times, and although I still love it, I can't read it now for a long time, because I practically know it by heart.

I think I've seen two adaptations, and both seem insipid to me. There needs to be one that makes Jane more like the elf or pixie type that Mr R refers to her as, and that makes Mr R uglier and more abrupt. And convey better the suppressed fireworks between them. The films seem to smooth things over too much and ruin the gothic-ness of it. They also never do St John properly, or his sisters. The power of the book is so much about things that happen under the surface though, that I quite see it would be difficult to do it justice on film.

You've made me want to read Les Mis even more now! I can't wait to start! Anything that wisewoman loves, I know I will love - it's like having my own brain vet something before I have to read it myself! :)

I completely agree that the wait for the next GRRM is excruciating. But if he ever does finish the series, as jintster so wisely remarks, I can guarantee you will love it.

#32 wisewoman: Wow, I can't believe that more of the gals at your other site aren't loving him. I sometimes felt a little ambivalent about what I saw as his overly forceful nature and his manipulations, but I agree, the end is what really solidifies his good character for me

You'll be sad to know that all three of the adaptations I've seen have left out that repentent speech at the end--the '83 adaptation makes a one-sentence reference (in the form of a voice-over from Jane) about how in the end, God tempered judgment with mercy. The '06 ended with Jane spouting some lines that weren't in the book and actually lying on top of Mr Rochester kissing him in the grass. The '73 cut to the obligatory carriage drive into the sunset.

#33 ncgraham: we seem to be agreeing quite a bit on various threads at the moment, no?
Agreed. :) I will give definitely that Orson Welles version a try. And thank you, thank you for mentioning Sandy Welch's name. I did some Googling--I didn't realize that the perpetrator of Jane Eyre '06 was also the perpetrator of Emma '09! I think you've saved me a lot of time and frustration there.

Nathan: Thanks for the recommendations. I wouldn't mind seeing the Zeferelli version, but I'm not running out to find it. I have the 1983 miniseries on hold at the library, and will also look for the Welles/Fontaine film. Sometimes the old ones are the best!

Medellia, you will have to let us know what you think of the Welles/Fontaine version when you see it.

*chokes a little at the end of the 2006 JE* Ick ick ick. Don't all these filmmakers realize the incredible potential in that speech of Rochester's? There is so much power there! That's it; I think we need to write our own screenplay of it.

Chocolate wrote: The power of the book is so much about things that happen under the surface though, that I quite see it would be difficult to do it justice on film.

Agreed!

jintster: Yes, Lewis' sci-fi/fantasy in the Space Trilogy is much more adult than his Narnia books. I've only read the Trilogy once and enjoyed it, but it isn't a light read. There are long philosophical parts that really are excellent, but they require a bit of an investment. I hope that doesn't put you off, but I understand if it does.

The Attolia books are technically YA fantasy (the first one was a Newbery Honor book, and one only wonders why it didn't win the award). The first one is a lot different from the second and third. Be extremely careful of spoilers — there are some great twists in those books and it just won't be as fun if you're spoilered beforehand!

Lorena, we are going to be reading Les Mis as a group here (http://www.librarything.com/groups/thequestforthelastpa) in December if you wanted to join us! I'm going to be helping to lead it *gulp*. No pressure though... I know sometimes that even fun group reads can feel a bit like homework, the second that there is any obligation attached.

I finished Jane Eyre last night, staying up waaaaay too late to do so. I have a busy weekend coming up and I knew I had to finish it then if I wanted to do it anytime soon. Here's my thoughts (warning: excessive adoration and rambling ahead): http://www.librarything.com/review/14524965

I also finished my audiobook of The Fellowship of the Ring and will be starting The Two Towers today. I'm debating whether or not to review each one separately...

Great JE review, Amy! You really made me want to give it another shot. I did already, but now I want to read it pronto. Yet I feel that way with many others as well! So many books, so little time....

I don't think Welch's '06 version ended with the kissing-in-the-grass scene necessarily—wasn't there a prologue of sorts in the form of a family portrait? It was cute, but not really Jane Eyre. I did like the endings for both the Welles and Zefferelli films; both finished off with Jane speaking in voiceover about the birth of their first child. Beautiful and poetic.

By the way, Medellia, I don't think Welch is all bad; I've heard really good things about her adaptations of North and South and Our Mutual Friend.

#39 ncgraham: Ok, I'll keep N&S and Our Mutual Friend as "maybes," then. :) Yes, there was the little family portrait scene after the kissing bit. It reminded me of the ending of the Paltrow Emma--yes, not very Jane Eyre.

Thanks WW. The CS Lewis trilogy sounds particularly good. I'm reading Anathem at the moment which is sci-fi and philosophy and enjoying it a lot (although it reminds me of how long ago my degree in the subject was and how little I remember!)

I absolutely loved your review of JE. What a great insight into her name! Why can't I ever spot that kind of stuff. Totally agree that the attraction of Jane is the combination of refusal to compromise her principles and her wonderful passion. Her childhood is indeed essential to understading this - the very first pages after all are about her refusal to give into bullying no matter how detrimental it is to her.

Welch adapted North and South? Really? I like that one! I haven't seen Our Mutual Friend.

jintster, I am excited that you're going to try the Space Trilogy! Keep us posted, of course.

And the thing about Jane Eyre's name occurred to me after I wrote the review. I was still thinking about the complexity of her character, those two sides she manages to reconcile, and it sort of hit me between the eyes. I did a lot of tweaking to that review after I'd posted it, actually. I'm glad you guys enjoyed it.

I finished Wren to the Rescue over lunch today and found time to snark: http://www.librarything.com/review/46420385

Not sure what I will read next. Maybe another Bronte??

I love your JE review, Amy! Especially the paragraph about St John - awesome insight there. You've helped me understand him better myself, he is such an enigmatic character, but rock-firm to who he is himself (hope that makes sense).

For the next Bronte, if you haven't yet read Villette, do. You will adore it.

I might join the Les Mis group read, not sure yet. I rather wanted to get to Moby Dick before Les Mis, and to finish LoTR before starting MD (only one epic journey/voyage at a time!), and December is getting scarily close. And the homework aspect you mention is very true, I tend to lose all desire to read something that someone's making me read. Even if someone lends me a book and says 'you have to read this, it's brilliant', I always find it a chore to get around to it, regardless of how brilliant it actually is.

Lorena — I really enjoyed Moby Dick and was one of the few people in my early basic English course to do so. I think most people in the class didn't even finish it :(. Happy reading, no matter what you decide to do!

I am putting Villette on the soon-to-read list. For now I took a detour into M. M. Kaye, a writer I've been curious about for awhile, in Death in Kashmir. So far it's quite good. The dialogue is wickedly clever and funny, and sprinkled with literary references and quotes. The writing takes a little getting used to; some of the transitions are very quick and I have to reread every now and then to understand what just happened. But I think I will end up liking it. The setting is fascinating too: India just before emancipation from British rule. This is a murder mystery + international intrigue... something Agatha Christie did NOT do very well (see Passenger to Frankfurt). We'll see if Kaye succeeds.

Well, I've almost decided to swap my reading order around, and go for Les Mis first, joining the group read, and then joining BJ's group read of Moby Dick early next year. Not quite fully decided, but pretty much almost decided. :) I was really looking forward to MD though, which is why the decision is so difficult.

I like the sound of Death in Kashmir, look forward to your review.

And if you don't actually adore Villette after all, I'm going to feel slightly bad, since it's a long book, thus a big committment. But Lucy Snowe is as complicated and unusual a character as Jane Eyre, and her name is just as telling. I do think you will love it.

Well, I finished Death in Kashmir and enjoyed it quite a bit, though it had some flaws. I was debating whether to give it three and a half stars or four. Flipping through it to find quotes put me in a good mood, so it gets four :). Full review is here: http://www.librarything.com/review/51478056

And I started Villette the other night. I'm not very far in but it's good so far. Not gripping like Jane Eyre, but apparently George Eliot liked it better than JE. The story doesn't seem terribly focused right now (is this about Lucy Snowe or Paulina?). But no doubt it will all come around and be connected as the story goes on.

I've had several of those recently—books in the 3-4 star range whose rating I wasn't entirely sure about. I'm still considering lopping off a half star for Catching Fire.

Your review makes me curious: do you dislike international intrigue in general, or is it simply that you have found this to be a weak point in the works of these two authors? I can't recall reading books with this as a plot element per se, but there are some fine movies that feature it. Of course, they are usually a little far-fetched. ;)

George Eliot liked Villette? Hmmm....

No, I don't dislike international intrigue in general. It was just so awful in Christie's book, so bad I didn't finish the book, and now I am skeptical when that element pops up in murder mysteries. Though to be fair, I haven't read many with it. Do I over-emphasize that in my review, do you think?

No, I don't think so. Just wondering.

And now for the question of the day: why can one not touchstone George Eliot's name in posts? Annoying.

>46 atimco:, I never found Villette to be as gripping as JE, I hope I didn't give that impression. It's absorbing rather than gripping - one is better able to put it down, but one tends to think about it while not reading it. (well, this one did anyway, having read it at least twice.) It's quieter than JE, though still with those lovely gothic moments... oh dear, now I want to read it again. I don't have tiiiiiiiiime!!!!

You make me want to read Death in Kashmir as well. Your reviews tend to have that effect...

Oh, and I agree that Passenger to Frankfurt is a truly dreadful book. At least I don't feel the need to read that again.

I couldn't even finish Passenger to Frankfurt. Porua, you're a big Christie fan — have you read that one?

I remembered something about Death in Kashmir that has made me take away that extra half-star and add something to my review:

"Oh, I remembered one other thing I didn't like. Charles and Sarah are discussing a mutual acquaintance and Sarah says, "This is the Atom Age—more's the pity—and anyone as spineless as Meril Forbes should be dumped straight back into a Brontë novel where she belongs" (p. 186). Excuse me? The heroines of Brontë novels are anything but spineless, thank you very much! I'm not sure why Kaye made that dig, but it was annoying — enough to lop off that extra half-star I couldn't decide if I should give it. Off it comes."

Humph.

and anyone as spineless as Meril Forbes should be dumped straight back into a Brontë novel where she belongs
Harumph indeed!

Nope. You see I've always been very certain about what I like and what I don't like. I've enjoyed reading all of the Marple and most of the Poirot books with a few non-series books thrown in. I just love the Christie mysteries! But I know that I will not enjoy any Christie book containing anything else like espionage or too many young energetic people running around (I guess you know which books I mean!). Passenger to Frankfurt falls into that category. So, I've steered clear of it or anything like that (so far!).

Okay, thanks Porua. I shall continue in my quest to find a Christie fan who likes the book, to explain to me why :)

I finally reviewed the audiobook of The Fellowship of the Ring that I finished about two weeks ago (review: http://www.librarything.com/review/51156746). I'm well into The Two Towers now and enjoying it very much.

And I hope to make some good progress in Villette today :)

I have finished and reviewed Villette: http://www.librarything.com/review/23972558. I enjoyed it, but it was rather a struggle to get through it. Maybe it was just that I had such a busy week and couldn't devote much time to it. It's no Jane Eyre, though! Still sorting through my thoughts on it.

As for Middle-earth, I am now in Book Four, with Frodo and Sam toiling through the Dead Marshes with Gollum. Rob Inglis does a very good Gollum voice! I will forgive him his deficiencies with Goldberry and Galadriel, I think.

Not sure what I will pick up next. I was contemplating a reread of Anne of Green Gables, to write a comprehensive review of it, but I requested some M. M. Kaye books on BookMooch and they have come, and are sitting tantalizingly on my desk...

I'm sorry you didn't love Villette Amy, on reflection I recall I had a similar reaction the first time I read it, and surprised myself by picking it up a second time for a re-read a year or two later. There's something magnetic and enigmatic about the book which makes me keep returning to it, and liking it more every time. So my wholehearted recommendation of it was probably a bit misleading. I'm certainly fascinated by it, and I'm looking forward to reading it again soonish, because I just know there are things in it that I haven't got to the bottom of yet.

As a teenager, I was always annoyed at how relentlessly unromantic her romance is in that book! But now I think it's part of the fascination. And for some reason, the image from the book that stays with me most of all is Lucy in her pink dress catching sight of herself unexpectedly in the mirror, and having that rare chance of seeing herself as a stranger, as others see her. There's something so poignant about that little moment.

I like your take on the ambiguous ending, I hadn't made that connection, but I'd say you're probably right.

Jane Eyre has just been offered the village school by St John. Mmmm, such a lovely book :)

A quick update!

I read and reviewed Kaye's Death in Berlin here http://www.librarything.com/review/52589687 (probably not news for anyone). I think I liked Death in Kashmir a little better.

About the ending of Villette, Rena, Lucy also says in the beginning of the last chapter that the three years that M. Paul was away were the happiest of her life. So yeah, I think their fate is fairly inescapable :(

I have picked up Patricia McKillip's Harrowing the Dragon on a whim. She writes so beautifully. My current favorite line is:

"The world is just another tiny island, ringed with a great dragon of stars and night."

Mm.

Right now I'm in the middle and we've left the main story to branch off into little vignettes that don't seem connected to the overarching plot. But they have to be somehow... though I could forgive her even if they were utterly random. Her writing is so lithe.

Edit: I feel so silly! This is what I get for not reading the dustjacket. Harrowing the Dragon is a collection of short stories! No wonder they are disconnected. But I think I may be pardoned for my mistake; McKillip often has two or three storylines going at once, and the first story was fairly long. And all of them are ending right when something interesting is happening! They are almost cliffhanger endings.

Amy, I left a message on your profile which you might have missed cos there's another one above it. I was confessing that I'm having to give up Quo Vadis again for a while. *sniffs dolefully*

Hm, I really have to start paying more attention when I read - hints like that one in Villette seem to always escape me.

I've dropped everything to read Unseen Academicals as of yesterday - it's full of hilarious gems, thrown in casually as Pratchett does so well.

Chocolate — I did see it, I've just been so swamped at work lately that I haven't had time for in-depth posts. I'm sorry you won't get into Quo Vadis right away, but I think it's a good choice overall. You can surfeit on rich literature until you make yourself sick on it. Save Quo Vadis for a later time; you have a lot of big reads coming up and it would be terrible to make them compete for your attention, when each deserves it undivided.

There is someone at my work reading Unseen Academicals. I went on a Pratchett binge about a year ago, and haven't been moved to read more of them yet. I did enjoy them, but I feel uneasy with the underpinnings of his world (of course Pratchett is an atheist). I should pick up another soon, just to spice up all the historical mysteries and classics I've been swallowing lately.

Amy, I did think twice about whether or not to mention the profile post, in case the reason was something like that. I didn't mean to pressure you into replying at any time!

I get a bit uneasy with Pratchett's underpinning of his world too, but get along okay by avoiding the ones that satirise Christianity such as Good Omens and Small Gods. His satire of everything else is so well done, I just keep on reading his books. I do spend half my time of reading him thinking 'okay okay, get on with it', and then he comes out with something so clever and hilarious that I fully forgive him and keep going.

As for LoTR, I am with Merry, just entering the siege of Minas Tirith. The bit before it, with Pippin, and Denethor and Faramir going into the tombs, and then of the Black Captain entering the city with Grond... wow. Just, wow. So vivid, so powerful, such imagery! It gave me happy chills down my spine.

No problem, Lorena! Sometimes I need a bump in the right direction anyways :)

His satire of everything else is so well done, I just keep on reading his books. I do spend half my time of reading him thinking 'okay okay, get on with it', and then he comes out with something so clever and hilarious that I fully forgive him and keep going.

Wow, this is exactly how I feel! Imagine that, Chocolate and I evincing literary twinliness :-P. I do want to pick up a Pratchett again soon. Maybe one of the Death stories; he's my favorite.

I'm not quite there yet in The Return of the King. I started it last night on my way home from work, and found the part with Pippin entering Minas Tirith as good as ever. It's great to see the city from his perspective. It's fascinating how Denethor is described as being like both Aragorn and Gandalf. A far cry from the flat, one-dimensional character they made him in the films!

I reviewed The Two Towers last night: http://www.librarything.com/review/52026852

I had a great reading weekend which has left me with a backlog of reviews to write. I finished Harrowing the Dragon, read Wodehouse's Jeeves in the Offing, and started Heyer's Venetia, which I finished last night. Reviews to come as soon as I can write them!

I think I will read Auntie Mame next. I found a lovely trade paperback of it a few months ago and picked it up on the strength of the blurbs. I guess it's been made into a movie, many plays, etc. It looks fun.

And I am tossing around the idea of rereading all the Anne of Green Gables books with an eye to in-depth reviews of each, but I'm not sure I will have time before December and Les Mis. Hmm.

I read Jeeves in the Offing a few years ago and to my surprise didn't enjoy it as much as I thought I would. I mean, I liked it but I had expected to love it.

It wasn't the funniest of his that I've ever read, but it did have me laughing hard in some places. Wodehouse just doesn't get old.

I churned out some reviews!

Harrowing the Dragon: http://www.librarything.com/review/51510630

Jeeves in the Offing: http://www.librarything.com/review/48855218

And for once, the reviews aren't full-length novels in themselves... :-P

Now at least I'm not the only one with a backlog of reviews. ;)

You'll have to let me know what you think of Auntie Mame. I know a few numbers from the musical, but worried about the subject matter of the story. If you like the book, I've heard that the non-musical movie version with Rosalind Russell is very good. (As opposed to the big-screen adaptation of the Broadway musical, "Mame," which stars Lucille Ball and is supposed to be absolutely terrible.)

Awesome reviews as usual. I greatly look forward to your review of Venetia - as a callow and hormonal teenager, I found that book thrillingly romantic, and I still have a soft spot for that awfully cliched hero to this day.

I never thought about the similarity between Gollum and Sam! Wow, of course, how true! I don't remember Sam's animal smile, but nevertheless, now that you say it, it's blindlingly obvious. Even in the film, when they're squabbling over the rabbits, it's there.

Speaking of the film, I watched TTT for the first time the other night (I never watch anything unless I've read it first, and rarely watch anything in general). Despite the strange liberties they took with the plot, it was awesomely done. I kept thinking of that quote, which you mention way back in an earlier post Amy, and is at the moment my favourite in all LoTR so far...

I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.

It seems to be a distillation of the thoughts of all the 'good guys' in LoTR. Somehow (I hope this doesn't sound silly) it's made me look around at my own priviliged life and the things I would fight to defend as well, and appreciate them more.

I understand the dramatic reasons for making Faramir weak in the film, but it seems a travesty on his character - unless I missed something in the book which is very possible considering the way I was devouring it a bit too fast in order to find out what would happen next (I said I wasn't going to do that, didn't I...). I also see that the changes to Eowyn's story was a good filmic decision, ditto for the annoyingness of Treebeard and Merry conning him into the decision. What I don't like is the way Treebeard is made to look so silly! He's supposed to have the great wisdom of all the Ages of Middle Earth, and instead he's a walking tree without much brain at all, let alone wisdom. Of course, it struck me while reading the book that it would be very hard to portray him well in film, and, well, they failed, in my opinion.

Also that decision to make Wormtongue's power over Theodin such an open enchantment of Saruman - is it so dramatic in the book? I remember it as being more the persuasiveness of Wormtongue than of Theodin being actually possessed by Saruman.

Sorry, probably no doubt everyone has had all these conversations before, long ago when the movie first came out. I'm a bit late I'm afraid.

No backlog anymore! I'm disappointed that you didn't enjoy Harrowing the Dragon more, but I enjoyed all your reviews, especially of Two Towers. I'll make a note not to pick Venetia as one of my first Heyers.

No worries about retreading old ground, Chocolate. We Tolkien nuts are still talking about this stuff, believe it or not. I'm glad you enjoyed your viewing of TT; the movies are pretty great, and capture the tone of the books pretty wonderfully—although that doesn't completely excuse some of the sillier and more questionable little changes they made. I'm still not reconciled to the changes to Faramir's character, and when he arrives in Minas Tirith in RotK, I just try to forget that he ever had that little bungle with Frodo and the ring.

And you're 100% right about the Theoden situation—there isn't such a supernatural aspect to it in the book. But I pardon them for this change, because the big scene in the Golden Hall is one of my favorite parts of the TT movie. The screenwriters' subtle use of Tolkien's dialogue there is brilliant. "Get your forked tongue behind your teeth! I did not pass through fire and death to bandy crooked words with a witless worm."

Funny, just as I was typing this "Evenstar" came up on my Pandora account. Hmm, guess what I'll be listening to this evening?

I started Auntie Mame last night and decided to put it down. It is well written and clever, certainly. Witty. But the jokes are crass and everything has a double meaning, and I don't care to spend time on a book where the characters mock things that are important to me. It just isn't fun anymore when that happens. So this one will be finding a new home via BookMooch or PaperBackSwap, and I have picked up its polar opposite, Anne of Green Gables :)

Lorena, I really, really love that quote too. It is one of the very best. I forget where I was reading this (maybe the LOTR thread on NarniaWeb), but someone was making the point that Tolkien wrote Faramir to please himself, and that he put aspects of his own personality — or what he wanted his personality to be — in Faramir. It makes sense; you can tell how much Tolkien loved the character. He has some of the best speeches in the book!

I always cringe when we get to the part in the film where they changed him so horribly. What did poor Faramir ever do to them???

I love the movies, but there are certainly some dreadful missteps in the way they adapted it. Stupid changes, and the addition of stupid humor that cheapens the characters and dumbs them down considerably. Have you noticed also the angsty conflicted Aragorn? He is so much more kingly and authoritative in the book! And don't get me started on Gandalf, or Frodo, or Denethor...

But other times they just get it perfectly, iconic moments. I adore the part when Théoen is saying part of that poem that starts with "Where is the horse and the rider?" The cinematography and music in that part is just brilliant.

It's funny... Todd (my husband) and I used to be charismatic Christians and we always loved the whole exorcism scene with Théoden and Gandalf. We still think it's pretty cool. But I do think they overdid his lethargy, and the transformation was a bit drastic if you ask me. He still needed to look like he was functioning as king, and he didn't. In the book it is much more subtle, not like demonic possession at all.

I don't remember Sam's animal smile, but nevertheless, now that you say it, it's blindlingly obvious.

When I started following this idea in the book, I was actually shocked how many times Sam is likened to a "faithful dog" and things like that. It's never in the least derogatory, but it makes a fascinating parallel with the animal-like descriptions of Gollum that are derogatory, like how he splays like a spider and looks like a whipped cur and all that. Part of Sam's dislike of Gollum is, at its root, jealousy. Frodo is his to serve, and everyone else can just move off! But he also lacks the "vision" of Frodo to see Gollum redeemed, too, being so rooted in common sense. It's such a complex thing.

Re: Harrowing the Dragon, Nathan, I think it's partly because it wasn't what I was expecting, and because I felt so cheated with the stories that ended just as they were beginning! Also, I'm just not a big fan of the short story genre. I want my books long so I can dive in and get lost in them for a while.

Here's my Venetia review: http://www.librarything.com/review/50001279. I wanted to like it more, but I was just so bothered by Venetia's actions near the end. When I came to the part where she is trying to think of ways to ruin herself so she is on Damerel's level, I think I actually winced. I was so afraid she was going to launch into some truly awful thing, something not just socially but also morally reprehensible. It didn't happen, thanks to a convenient twist, but she would have made it happen if it hadn't. And that just bothers me :(. Perhaps I would like it better on a reread, eventually.

I'm thoroughly enjoying Anne of Green Gables and I can't wait to review it! Montgomery is a genius at characterization, and her humor is so wholesome. It doesn't stale, somehow — maybe because it's so clearly drawn from real life.

And now I want to watch the movies again, on a cold night with a cosy fire going in the fireplace... mm.

Hah, now I feel more legitimately allowed to be cross about Faramir - I was worried I'd missed something. Indeed, how dare they.

True too about angst-ridden Aragorn, only again I thought I'd missed something - namely that I haven't read the backstory yet about him and Arwen in the Appendix, which I intend to read after I've finished the actual story. So I thought that maybe the angst of Aragorn is in there somewhere, and that we should assume it's going on throughout LoTR, but that we, seeing things mainly through hobbit-eyes, aren't priviliged to see much of what Aragorn is really thinking.

Calling anyone a 'faithful dog' however nicely it's said always gives me cold cringes. I thankfully haven't noticed - remember Sam's humble devotion to Frodo was one of those things I had to get over before I could enjoy the book, so I guess I've successfully closed my eyes to strong references to that. Your thoughts on the jealousy thing are great. I feel like I've missed a lot in this reading, but I think that's okay - it is my first reading after all. There are many re-reads to come, methinks.

Re Venetia, I always treated it lightly and didn't analyse her moral desires - at least I didn't believe or take them seriously. I tend to read most of Heyer on a surface level, except I get a bit uncomfy with The Masqueraders and These Old Shades at times. If I read Venetia again some time, I'd say I'll be approaching it rather differently from how I have before now. That poem quoted throughout, supposedly by Ben Jonson, called Admir'd Venetia - I've looked for it and come to the conclusion that Heyer made it up. Would you agree?

ncgraham, I loved that line in the movie too, only I couldn't have said if it was a direct quote - it certainly sounds truly Tolkienesque. It reminds me of that other one, where Gandalf fighting the Balrog "smote him down upon the mountainside".

It's shortened and slightly altered, but pretty close to the text. The original has "A witless worm you have become. Therefore be silent, and keep your forked tongue behind your teeth. I have not passed through fire and death to bandy crooked words with a serving-man till the lightning falls."

I'm not surprised about Auntie Mame, Amy. Ah well. Enjoy your visit to Green Gables.

That's interesting that your Charismatic background so affected your viewing of that one scene; I hope it hasn't spoiled it for you, because it's really a brilliant bit of cinema, though I agree with you that the lethargy was a bit overdone. And I love, love, love the "Horse and the Rider" scene. Basically anytime the script keeps close to Tolkien's text, Jackson gets a chance to show off with his cinematography, and Shore's music is playing in the background is a moment to cherish. Next time I watch the films I should make a list of all my favorite moments. And that should be soon, as I'm planning to watch them over Christmas break, possibly with my brother.

Yes, I think it likely Heyer made up the Venetia poem. She was certainly quite capable of doing so, if it served her story!

Green Gables has been WONDERFUL. I had an extremely readerly weekend, finishing the first book Friday and downing the next five over Saturday and Sunday :). So I have quite a backlog of reviews to write! Just two more books and I'll have finished the series. I love it so much!

I did get the first review written: http://www.librarything.com/review/14523367

I think we are going to watch the miniseries the day after Thanksgiving, after a day of decorating the house, setting up the tree, etc. One thing I stipulate: we must have a cosy fire going. I want try to start early enough so we can get through both parts :)

Anne of Avonlea: http://www.librarything.com/review/14523382

I have a feeling these reviews are going to get shorter and shorter :-P

I don't much like Paul either. It actually really gets on my nerves every time he says "You know, Teacher". I mildly like Miss Lavendar, but the book would be just as strong without her (except then we'd never meet Charlotta the Fourth, which would be a tragedy).

Great review!

Ditto, Rena. I always liked Davy much better than Paul. A little monster, to be sure, but so endearing! :)

I finally got some reviews done today.

Anne of the Island: http://www.librarything.com/review/14523395

Anne of Windy Poplars: http://www.librarything.com/review/14523402

Anne's House of Dreams: http://www.librarything.com/review/14523409

And some more:

Anne of Ingleside: http://www.librarything.com/review/14523417

Rainbow Valley: http://www.librarything.com/review/14523426

Rilla of Ingleside: http://www.librarything.com/review/14523433

I'm done now with Montgomery for a bit, I promise :P. I really enjoyed my foray into her world this past week.

Not sure what I'll read next...

Lovely reviews. I feel almost as if I've just read the books all over again.

Rilla is far and away my favourite book of the series. I've never yet found another book set during the war that is firmly set 'on the home front' - never showing us a battle, apart from a short excerpt from one of Jem's letters. It shows us the other side of wartime, that we almost never see in fiction. And Susan Baker is, I think, one of the best fictional characters of all time... "never mind, Mrs Doctor dear, Susan is at the helm."

Windy Poplars is another favourite (published as Windy Willows in other countries). I love the pageant of characters, each more colourful than the last. I love the visit with Mrs Tomgallon in particular, and her day with the grumpy woman in the wheelchair whose name I've forgotten.

Ahh, Anne. Thanks for sending me back to her world for a while :)

Thanks, Rena. There's no one quite like Anne! And great thoughts on Rilla. Susan is one of my favorite characters.

I started Mark Dunn's Ella Minnow Pea last night and am enjoying it with reservations. On one hand, it's very witty and funny and cute. But on the other, it could be a well-disguised stab at organized religion — which certainly has its flaws, but...

It's like the Pratchett conversation we were having over in your thread, Rena. I don't mind people poking a little fun at some Christian things (like traditions and assumptions and non-sacred things like that) from the inside. But let an outsider start using Christianity as fodder for satire and teasing, and it feels very meanspirited.

Finished and reviewed Ella Minnow Pea this afternoon: http://www.librarything.com/review/47910118

Next up is Emma. Yay!

Your opinion sits about even with what I've read from other intelligent reviewers. I made the decision some time ago to not waste time on it - though I'd like to skim through it some time to see how the language changes. I think it's basically a gimmick though, more than a novel.

Gimmick is a good word, definitely.

I finished The Lord of the Rings yesterday! And wrote a review: http://www.librarything.com/review/52927519. So funny that we wrote our reviews on the same day, Chocolate. Yours is great, by the way. I'm so happy that you enjoyed it so much.

I also finished my reread of Emma yesterday and liked it much better than I did the first time around. Incidentally, it is my 100th print book this year. Review: http://www.librarything.com/review/29100502

Next up I will be listening to The Magician: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel by Michael Scott. SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com/) sent it to me free of charge, asking only that I write a review and allow them to post it on their website. I write reviews for everything anyways, and free is always good! Plus I get to add my byline at the end of the review. So we'll see how it works out. It appears that The Magician is the second in the series, so I better read some plot summaries of the first one. I think each can stand alone, but we'll see.

And my next print book will be my third read of Les Misérables, with the salon. I'm looking forward to it!

Great reviews as always, Amy. I'm hoping my reread of Emma for class in the spring goes as well as yours did. And both your and Rena's reviews for RotK are egging me on to finish the book. Interestingly, I listened to a podcast by Dr. Peter Kreeft recently about Tolkien's "Language of Beauty", and mentioned in passing that he thought the Scouring of the Shire was skipped in the movies for the same reason Faramir's character was changed—it just doesn't fit with the ideological dictates of mainstream Hollywood. I've been meaning to find his e-mail adress and ask him what he meant by that.

Yay for us reviewing on the same day! That's brilliant timing! :) Great review of yours too!

As for Emma, I had a meh reaction when I first read it, and then loved it the second time around. Interesting point about the fathers, I hadn't noticed it myself. Even in S&S, he's supposedly a good father but the book opens with his death. In Northanger Abbey, there is a father who's a good enough parent, but the book is much more dominated by the Tilney's father, who's an awful man if there ever was one.

Nathan, that's fascinating. If you ever find out what he meant, please tell us! Hollywood is pro-communist/fascist? (I don't know which of those suits the Shire doings). I'm clearly missing something.

(EDIT typo)

#79 I've read and re-read Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice and Persuasion many, many times. I even broke my no TV/movie adaptations and audio books rule for them. But I've never felt the urge to re-read Emma or Sense and Sensibility. I didn't hate or love these two. I just felt nothing. But now that you say that you like Emma better the second time around, I'm thinking maybe I'll give it another read next year. Maybe I’ll see it in a new light.

Excellent review of Emma. As you know, I enjoyed it the first and second time around (both of which were this year). Emma and Persuasion are my two Austen favorites.

I enjoyed the paragraph about fathers, too. It's a dangerous world when the best father out there is Mr Bennet. ;) Though I am very fond of that particular character, despite his flaws.

wisewoman, I'm not a part of this challenge, but have been enjoying your reviews for many months. Indeed, one of my most used tags at this point is "boLT rev wisewoman" (because of LT review by wisewoman)!

Now I don't even remember how I got here from your hot review today for Emma. But while reading through this thread, especially post 29, wherein you mention that Jane Eyre will probably be in your all time top five, I got to wondering - what ARE your favorite books of all time? I checked your collections and tags and didn't find the answer. But, having learned to trust your judgment through your lovely reviews, I find myself eagerly looking forward to seeing what books are your top 10 all time favorites.

Rena/81, agreed about Mr. Morland being a bit of an exception to the rule. Indeed, Catherine Morland seems to have the best all-around family life of any Austen heroine. And as for the Kreeft/LotR matter, what interests me most is that he linked the omission of the Scouring with the changes to Faramir. I really am going to have to email him.

countrylife/84, you're in good company! I always enjoy Amy's reviews as well. We should start a fan club ... oh wait, we already sort of have one in this thread. :P

EDIT: I see several of my reviews have caused you to add books to your wishlist as well. Delighted, and honored!

Oh, yes! I loved a LOT of your reviews, ncgraham! You may even have been able to deduce the day that my review surfing happened in your territory, for scrolling through them now, I notice a lot of green thumbs-up that I got to contribute that day! My favorite was The Florist's Daughter.

Sorry I have not replied to you all for a little while. We've been so busy at work, I have no downtime and even lunch breaks have been swallowed up.

Nathan wrote "...the Scouring of the Shire was skipped in the movies for the same reason Faramir's character was changed—it just doesn't fit with the ideological dictates of mainstream Hollywood."

Hmm. Maybe it's the whole idea of the common man taking up arms against his oppressor that they don't like? :-P

About the fathers in Austen's work, I wish it were otherwise because I am an advocate of good fatherhood. And I do *like* some of the weaker fathers... Mr Bennet and Mr Woodhouse and quite fun in their own ways. But they aren't really men you can respect. It's a pity, but perhaps it is necessary for the character development of their daughters. The Morlands do seem to be the healthiest family among Austen's characters, but even in that story, Catherine has to get away from home for things to start happening.

Porua, S&S was my first Austen and I've revisited it many times. I really love it. There is this amazing tension between being sensible and being reckless, and the cost that each extracts. Maybe someday you'll get the urge to reread and will enjoy it more.

And if you are going to break any rules against adaptations, you REALLY ought to do so for the Emma Thompson S&S. It's brilliant. Every time I see it I'm blown away again. It has a lovely score by Patrick Doyle and some wonderful performances by the cast (Emma Thompson plays Elinor and is a bit too old for the role, but she does such a good job that I forgive the casting!). Nathan will back me up in this, won't you, Nathan? Watch the Thompson S&S! :)

countrylife, I'm so glad you popped in! And wow, I feel so flattered that you enjoy my reviews so much. It's a joy to write them, and even more of a joy to know they are appreciated.

You are right — I really do need to compile a list of my all-time favorites. Look for that soon; I am planning on doing that. I'll mention it here when I get to it. Thanks for the nudge! :)

So I've been mourning a bit because there is a library I visit along the way of my hour drive to work, and they were having a booksale this weekend that I would miss because it opened and closed during my work hours. So I had to pass the sign announcing the sale each day and know that I couldn't make it. Poor Amy.

But my work had their Christmas party last night (I didn't go because of the long drive home and then back out there with my husband, and then back home again... ugh). So they let everyone out a little early. But even then, I would be arriving at the library right at five when the sale closed.

I considered begging and pleading. I thought I could convince the staff that I really wanted to spend my money on their books and thus help the library (whose levy failed in November). Maybe if I played up that angle, they would let me go down to the basement and browse unattended, and bring my books up afterwards to pay at the circ desk?

I went into the library prepared to prostrate myself, and heard noises from the basement. I went down and the door was open! A few people were still lingering, and I asked if I could take a look around. The lady running the sale graciously acquiesced, and I hurried off to check out the shelves. She was so kind!

And do you know, she didn't even charge me the official sale prices? I counted up my books (12 paperbacks, 6 hardbacks) and started doing mental arithmetic when she eyed the stack and told me a price. I walked out with 18 books for five bucks, and this when the sale was supposed to be closed!

I found a lot of Evelyn Waugh (who is harder to find at sales than you might think), a duplicate Heyer I can give to a friend (Lady of Quality), a nice copy of Quentin Durward by Sir Walter Scott, The Misanthrope and Tartuffe by Moliére (*winks at Porua*), a couple of books to list on BM and PBS, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon, two Faulkner books (why not?), and a few others.

I also found a book called Emma, but by Charlotte Bronte, not Jane Austen. Supposedly it's a fragment of Bronte's work, completed by "Another Lady." Medellia has already given me some info on it, which leads me to hope that it is not utterly banal, but we'll see. I had passed it the first time because I saw "Emma" and thought it was just another copy of Austen's book. I'm sure my face was funny as I connected Bronte with Emma and wondered why it didn't look right :)

So that was my adventure at the sale. I love my library!

Currently I am reading Les Miserables and am thoroughly enjoying it. I don't want to spoiler anything for anyone... I've just finished Fantine's story. I didn't cry this time, but this was the point where I was tearing up and sniffing on my first read. It's kindness that breaks us.

I am also listening to The Magician: The Immortal Secrets of Nicholas Flamel by Michael Scott on audiobook. I am sure it is suffering greatly by being consumed alongside the likes of Les Mis, but I'm finding it very, very mediocre. Scott has an annoying habit of telling rather than showing. After every comment by the character Josh, Scott tells us "he felt angry and confused," "he was upset," "he was unsure what to do," etc. A good writer will show us that without telling us so clunkily. Also, the whole idea of all these legendary heroes running around is just a bit too cutesy. The protagonists are being chased all over Paris by — get this — Niccolo Machiavelli. It's just a little lame.

But maybe I am just losing my taste for YA fiction. I hope not; I love the genre. I would prefer to believe that this is just a rather blah example of it.

18 books for 5 bucks = 28 cents per book. Well done, WW! The best I've ever done is 20-something books that averaged out to 37 cents per.

I'd like to give another nudge for your all time favorites too. How 'bout a top 100 or even top 500?

I really wish I could talk Jane Austen, the Brontes, etc. et al., with all you fine folks (and I say that sincerely, uncynically) since it's obvious how much fun and comraderie you share in each others company. It's quite attractive, from an outsiders perspective.

What a great story. Oh you are so lucky! So many good books at such a great price. I wish I could have been there too!

I have seen parts of Sense and Sensibility. And from what I’ve seen I think I do like Emma Thompson’s performance in it. But I still for some reason cannot sit through the whole movie.

While I’m glad that you bought two of Molière’s best known works (and I do recommend Molière’s The Miser) I do not recommend his The Misanthrope and Tartuffe for everyone. They created great controversy at the time of their original production. I believe Molière got in to trouble with the church for Tartuffe. The Miser is much milder compared to these two. But of course you should read and judge them for yourself. :-)

Enrique wrote: I really wish I could talk Jane Austen, the Brontes, etc. et al., with all you fine folks (and I say that sincerely, uncynically) since it's obvious how much fun and comraderie you share in each others company.

Well, I have a solution for you. Read Austen and the Brontes :). We will allow you to be a part of our exclusive club if you do. This is a limited-time offer, so act quickly!

Porua, that's one thing I always wish for at booksales: a kindred spirit to drown in the bliss with me! I used to have some book-buddies who would go booksaling with me, but then they went off to college. People's priorities these days, sheesh.

I shall try to start with The Miser, then, before I touch any other Moliére. I thought maybe The Misanthrope was the same as The Miser (the terms boil down to something similar in the end, don't they?), but apparently not.

>88 absurdeist: Rique! You're not an outsider, even if you haven't read Bronte and Austen! If you want to join in, just Cliff-Note it and come right in! :)

Amy, I am soooo jealous. Here in my area, if there is a book sale (rare occasion), I would come in breathlessly only to find it's all Mills & Boon, with a bit of Dan Brown and Di Morrissey. South-Western Sydney is an awesome place in lots of ways, but you don't come here for the literary culture.

Quick update... I finished The Magician: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel and wrote a review for it. I am reviewing it for SF Site, so I'm waiting for them to post it before I put my review on LT. One-word summary: mediocre.

I was going to start my second audiobook for SF Site, K. E. Mills' The Accidental Sorcerer, but it turned out to be two MP3 CDs instead of regular audio CDs so I can't listen to them in the car. I have to use iTunes on my computer at home, which greatly limits the time I have to listen to it. I did start it today and it's pretty good so far. Reminds me a bit of Terry Pratchett and J. K. Rowling. I'm fairly certain I'll like it more than The Magician.

So to fill up my commute time I am listening to Dorothy Sayers' first Lord Peter mystery, Whose Body?. It's excellent, and David Case's reading is very good. His voice for the Duchess ruins all my theories about how women readers are better at doing men's voices than men are at doing women's. It sounds so much like a woman I caught myself listening carefully just to see if I could hear similarities between that voice and Case's regular narrative voice.

I was a bit taken aback at the anti-semitism, though. I'm not sure if Sayers was anti-semitic. I think it's a bit more complex than that. Basically the man who has disappeared was a Jew and much is made of the fact that "one can be a Jew and still be a good man." Eep! But maybe that was a very progressive statement at the time (1923).

In my other reading, I am done with Out of the Blues and will be writing an in-depth review soon. It will be interesting to write, because it promotes biblical concepts that fly right in the face of commonly accepted secular ideas about psychology and depression.

I also need to review that book on prayer by Philip Yancey. Don't think I will finish it; his theology is just too shoddy.

And I am looking forward to diving into Les Mis again this weekend. I haven't touched it for about a week because we've been so incredibly busy. I wonder how much I can get read tomorrow afternoon and Monday. Though I am on vacation this coming week, I have a lot of family activities planned and don't know how much reading time I can squeeze in.

Glad you enjoyed Whose Body? despite the "eep!" factor (and eep indeed!) I'm a Sayers fan, though I've yet to read all of her books. From what I remember, Sayers herself wasn't anti-semitic, but did write to show her world and times. Of those I've read, Whose Body? was probably my least favorite, though I liked it fine. The Nine Tailors is my favorite, with Gaudy Night a close second, so if you move forward you've got some fine, fun reading to do.

We're soon to be on a plane to Texas to be with family so my LT time in the coming days will be brief. If I don't "speak" to you again, have a very Merry Christmas!

Teresa, I tried Nine Tailors as my first Sayers, and was turned off. I've read since that it's not a good one to start with. I intend to try again some time. I imagine that once you know the characters better you appreciate Nine Tailors more? Or maybe I'm just not a Sayers type, which would be sad, since I was pretty much brought up by Agatha Christie (metaphorically that is).

No, I'm not sure that knowing the characters would make a huge difference. It might just be a difference of literary tastes, yes? I remember being riveted by Nine Tailors (it was one of those stay-up-all-night-to-finish books), but that may just be me.

What a coincidence! Agatha brought me up, too, with some help from Sherlock Holmes. Have either of you tried Josephine Tey? I picked up all of her mysteries cheaply from Bookcloseouts.com and have been meaning to get to them for ages.

And a Merry Christmas to you, too. ChocolateMuse!

"...since I was pretty much brought up by Agatha Christie (metaphorically that is)."

Hey that is exactly how I feel! I find a lot of mysteries out there do not suit me because I was brought up by Agatha Christie too. :-)

I love that you guys enjoy good old murder mysteries too! I'm rather new to mysteries in general, and only met Christie a few years ago. So I'm not overly addicted to her style (though I do love it, and acknowledge her brilliance!).

I'm not quite done with Whose Body? yet, but an incautious glance at its Wiki page (looking for the date of publication) spoilered the murderer for me :(. Ah well. At least it will be fun getting there! I agree, it doesn't seem that Sayers herself is prejudiced, but that she is merely depicting the attitude of her times.

She really is funny at times. I need to hunt up my paperback so I can quote the sentences that have made me giggle. There's one about Mr. Thipps' hair, which is giving up its unequal struggle with destiny (ie he's going bald), and other snarky lines like that. At one point Lord Peter sympathizes with the unhelpful neighbors, saying how Christian feelings really can break up one's domestic peace. LOL!

The Nine Tailors was my first Sayers too. She definitely got very technical and involved, and it's very leisurely (very different from Christie, who gets right down to it). I don't think it's really a good place to start with her work. I preferred Murder Must Advertise — hilarious to me especially because I work in an ad agency and Sayers NAILED it — and then her Lord Peter/Harriet Vane novels really blew me away when I read them maybe a year or so ago. Rena, I wonder if you would be better off starting there. The first one is Strong Poison. I didn't read them in order but I wish I did. They are: Strong Poison, Have His Carcase, Gaudy Night, and Busman's Honeymoon. There's one more that someone else finished, but I haven't read that one yet. I encourage you to give Sayers another try. She really is brilliant.

Josephine Tey is another mystery author I would recommend in the same breath as Dorothy Sayers. I've read Miss Pym Disposes, Brat Farrar, The Daughter of Time, and The Franchise Affair. All were excellent.

I've recently started another collection titled To Read in 2010: http://www.librarything.com/catalog/wisewoman/toreadin2010. I'll be adding more books as I think of them. Do you guys have any definite reading plans for 2010?

Teresa, I probably expected Nine Tailors to be too much like Christie. I tend to make that kind of mistake with expectations.

Porua, I can never enjoy the blood-and-guts type murder stories now because of my Christie upbringing.

Amy, I will check out Strong Poison some time this, er, next, year. Thanks for the tip! I will also look out for Josephine Tey.

When I read a murder mystery, I look for cosy, with an emphasis on characters more than on murder. Have you people seen Georgette Heyer's mysteries? They outdo Christie in Christie-ness sometimes. I highly recommend Behold, Here's Poison. Don't start with Envious Casca or Penhallow though - and Footsteps in the Dark isn't her best.

Amy in answer to your question, my definite reading plan involves attacking some of the Big Ones, to read along with a random selection that comes to hand as I go. So I definitely intend to finish Les Mis, and later read Moby Dick, and maybe start on one of the Russians. I prefer to do it this way - a definite plan for a few books, and go according to my mood for the rest.

Where are you others putting your 2010 threads? I'm thinking I'll go to 75 Challenge, unless we start a group of our own! :) Because I'm definitely NOT aiming to read 75, or any other particular number of books, I just want to read and review and chat with people like you as I go. And I don't feel like I'll be wanted in Club Read, which is the closest existing group to that kind of thing that I know of. (besides, I don't always feel like being erudite, even if I could be!)

Chocolate wrote: Have you people seen Georgette Heyer's mysteries? They outdo Christie in Christie-ness sometimes.

I have not yet, but I'm planning on it this year! I'll look for Behold, Here's Poison to start me off. I seem to recall you giving me good advice about a place to start in Heyer before :)

To wrap up my 2009 reads:

• The Magician: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel: Wasn't too much of a fan of this one. I won't be bothering with the rest of the series, and I'm really at a loss to understand Scott's seeming popularity. *shrugs* Full review here: http://www.librarything.com/review/53437849

• Out of the Blues: This was a great book but a difficult one to review because it is so divisive. Full thoughts: http://www.librarything.com/review/53192975

• Prayer: Does it Make Any Difference?: Did not care for this one and did not finish it. http://www.librarything.com/review/50520059

• Whose Body?: This was an audiobook and I loved every minute of it! A great performance from both Sayers and the reader David Case. Review: http://www.librarything.com/review/43813515

• The Foundling: I just finished and reviewed this one today, but I'm counting it for 2009 anyhow. I thoroughly enjoyed it, though Cotillion and Friday's Child are still the most inspired Heyer I've yet read. Full review: http://www.librarything.com/review/54151885

I created a collection to chronicle my 2009 reads here: http://www.librarything.com/catalog/wisewoman/read/reviewedin2009. My grand total is 124 books on the year, 26 of which were audiobooks. My original goal was 120, so I'm happy.

I'll be opening a thread in Club Read and will edit this post with a link to it.

Edit: Here is my 2010 Club Read thread. See you guys there! :)