2010: Porua spends another year reading impulsively

Hello everyone! I’m happy to join the 50 Book Challenge once again. Hopefully this year even more people will drop by my thread! Also hoping to see all my friends who dropped by the previous year!

Some things about myself. I love to read mystery/detective stories (mostly cozy mysteries), plays and short stories. I don’t enjoy reading about any kind of romance (I hate love! Nah, just kidding!). But what I love most is reading classic books. Then again I may end up reading books from other genres if they happen to come my way.

I never have any reading goals or follow any lists. I just read whatever happens to catch my fancy. I don’t know how many books I’d be able to read in 2010 but I wish to share my experience of reading each and every book with all of you.

My 50 Book Challenge thread for 2009 can be found here, http://www.librarything.com/topic/72408

That’s all for now! Hope all of you will join me! :-)

Gotcha starred! Can't wait to see what plays are up next!

Ooh-La-La! That picture! :-) Since I'm not big on mysteries, I'll have to rely on you to point me toward the "best of the best" again! Happy reading, Porua. I've got you starred!

Just a final thought re your 2009 favorite reads: I played Vinnie in my high school's production of Life with Father. I was brilliant. ;) Have you seen the old movie version with a terribly young and quite beautiful Elizabeth Taylor?

# 2 Hello again, theaelizabet! Like I said in my 2009 thread, am so glad to finally find someone who has actually read The Playboy of the Western World. Also, to find someone who likes reading plays. I was beginning to think I’m the only one who enjoys plays! Glad to find you! And once again, thank you for starring my thread!

Oh yes I've seen the old Life with Father movie. I saw it on TV as a kid and loved it. In fact, that is one of the reasons I picked up this book. Although the book and movie are kind of different, I do love them both. Unfortunately, the movie is in the public domain and the only versions available for viewing now are really bad quality second, third generation copies made from video tapes.

# 3 Hi, bonniebooks! Thank you for starring my thread! Yeah, that picture’s lovely, isn’t it? It is Young Girl Reading A Book by the French Painter Etienne Adolphe Piot.

Come on, read more mysteries this new year! Join us on the dark and sinister world of mysteries. You know you want to!

Thank you for dropping by. Happy reading to both of you! :-)

Edited to fix touchstone

STAR! Thanks for the link in my thread :)

# 6 Thank you for starring my thread. :-)

It is said that the basis for the character of Father Brown was Father John O'Connor, who was a parish priest in Bradford. Father O'Connor was involved in Chesterton's conversion to Catholicism in 1922. Chesterton wrote 52 short stories featuring Father Brown. All of the short stories were compiled in to five books later on.

The Innocence of Father Brown, the first of the five collections was published in 1911.

Full disclosure! I started reading this book in 2009. Finally managed to finish it today. This book, along with the rest of the collections, has been on my TBR list for God knows how long! I finally got down to reading The Innocence of Father Brown. I intend to read the rest of them soon.

There are twelve classic mystery short stories in this volume. Father Brown first appears in the story The Blue Cross, the first story in The Innocence of Father Brown.

The character of Father Brown is a unique creation in the world of literature. Inconspicuous in appearance, Father Brown has an uncanny ability to see into the dismal abyss of the criminal mind. This skill, according to Father Brown himself, comes from his experience as a priest and as a confessor. Another one of his characteristics is his absolute rationality. He always seeks the natural explanation for any kind of phenomenon.

In this collection my favorites are, The Blue Cross,The Queer Feet,The Invisible Man and The Sign of the Broken Sword.

Chesterton's writing is simply great. When compared to modern mysteries the language seems simply divine. His wit is just delightful, for example, this passage from the story,The Queer Feet,

“A waiter came swiftly along the room, and then stopped dead. His stoppage was as silent as his tread; but all those vague and kindly gentlemen were so used to the utter smoothness of the unseen machinery which surrounded and supported their lives, that a waiter doing anything unexpected was a start and a jar. They felt as you and I would feel if the inanimate world disobeyed-- if a chair ran away from us.”

Seriously, who can write like this nowadays?

Having said all that, this is a rather long collection of stories. One has to space the reading out a bit, or else it just might get a little monotonous.

All of the solutions are more or less logical but some of them do seem a little bit far fetched and some solutions do appear to be somewhat abrupt. Also, the long descriptions of nature and scenery, although beautiful, do get in the way of the main mystery sometimes.

Father Brown prefers to solve the mysteries with an air of spirituality and philosophy, which can get tedious from time to time. He is often more concerned with the salvation of the offender’s soul than with actually punishing them for their crimes.

The Father Brown mysteries are maybe not as well known as the Agatha Christie or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle ones. But anyone who likes Christie and Doyle’s books will also like the Father Brown mysteries. As someone who has read every Sherlock Holmes, Miss Marple mystery out there and most of the Poirot mysteries, I would recommend the Father Brown mysteries to all the mystery buffs.

A somewhat long but satisfying journey.

Edited to fix touchstone.

Well, let's see what this year would bring. I'm in.

# 9 Thank you for joining us. Hope you enjoy my reviews.

Love the Father Brown review, Porua! You hit on all the things that make him endearing, and that passage you quoted is brilliant. It's not a mystery, but I recommend Chesterton's The Napoleon of Notting Hill if you haven't read anything else of his yet. The beautiful, incisive style is all there — powerful, haunting in places and funny in others. Chesterton is definitely unique.

# 11 Thank you, Amy! Isn't that passage just wonderful? It is funny but at the same time insightful. It explains the feelings of the characters so clearly that any modern reader today who does not know what it was like to be served by a posse of servants and butlers could totally recognize the situation. Even after so many years his prose remains so easily understandable.

I haven't read anything by Chesterton other than a collection of some of his best Father Brown stories and The Innocence of Father Brown. But I'll surly look for this one. Thank you for your suggestion!

Hi Porua, I'm a little late but I'm here :) I'll be keeping an eye on your reviews in 2010, my old love of mysteries was rekindled last year so I'm looking forward to some good suggestions here. Happy reading!

It's o.k. I'm just glad that you are here.

"...my old love of mysteries was rekindled last year so I'm looking forward to some good suggestions here."

Yes! More mysteries for everyone in 2010! Happy reading to you too. :-)

I have a TON of mysteries on my 2010 to-read list. I need to get further in the Brother Cadfael series, I am now interested in the rest of the Amelia Peabody books, I want to read at least the first of Stephanie Barron's Jane Austen mysteries, there's one by Charles Williams on there, etc... see what a bad influence you are, Porua! :-P

# 15 I see that you’ve discovered my “evil” plan to get everyone addicted to mysteries. I’m planning, nay, “plotting” to build an army of mystery hungry readers! And soon we’ll take over LT. Today LT, tomorrow the world! (Evil laughter and ominous music!!!)

;-)

Agh! *runs away screaming but remembers to take her next mystery read with her*

I'm so glad I found you. Star! You and I have basically the same reading goal: Mine is "Read what I want when I want"! I'd love to have you stop by my new thread which is here. Happy Reading in 2010.

# 18 "You and I have basically the same reading goal: Mine is "Read what I want when I want"!"

Yeah, that's pretty much my goal too. Thank you for starring me. Got you starred too. Happy Reading!

Then wear the gold hat, if that will move her;
If you can bounce high, bounce for her too,
Till she cry ‘Lover, gold-hatted, high-bouncing lover,
I must have you!’

Thomas Parke D’Invilliers

This poem in essence sums up the story of Jay Gatsby, the protagonist of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby.

Published in 1925, The Great Gatsby was not popular in its own time (it sold less than 25,000 copies during the remaining fifteen years of Fitzgerald's life, I believe). It received its status as an American classic, after being republished in the 40’s/50’s.

It was ranked second in the Modern Library's list of the 100 Best Novels of the 20th Century.

The book describes the Jazz Age. As the economy soared during the 1920’s and Prohibition came in to effect, the rich led a life which seemed like an endless party. With Prohibition came the rise of organized crime. Bootlegging became a fast and easy way to make a quick buck. The story is said to be a critique of ‘the American Dream’. Fitzgerald criticized the self-indulgence of the Jazz Age, the uncontrolled greed and the lack of morality in it all.

But for me, the heart of the story is the man Gatsby. His obsessive love for Daisy, his dream and the futility of it all wrings my heart every time I read this book.

There is something so miserable about Gatsby throwing one lavish party after another, hoping each day that Daisy would show up at one of them.

Gatsby is a strange creation. He triumphs at everything he sets out to do and yet he looses. He wins and yet he is defeated and betrayed by everyone.

Among the other characters, Nick Carraway stands out. He is the perfect narrator. His personality fits just right, not too strong, not too weak and definitely not irritating. It feels as though his observations (as an outsider) about the lives of the rich and famous living in the neighborhood are just what the reader’s would be if the reader was present there. The unusual friendship between Nick and Gatsby is especially touching.

I have almost no complaint with the story. But the relationship between Nick Carraway and Jordan Baker does seem unnecessary to me.

As for Fitzgerald's writing, it is easy to read and uncomplicated. The narrative flows effortlessly.

The Great Gatsby is ultimately a story about impossible dreams and the price one pays for chasing a dream for too long. A true classic and I highly recommend it.

Long after finishing the book what remains with me is the character of Gatsby and Nick’s final meeting with him,

“ ‘They’re a rotten crowd’, I shouted across the lawn. ‘You’re worth the whole damn bunch put together.’

I’ve always been glad I said that. It was the only compliment I ever gave him…First he nodded politely, and then his face broke into that radiant and understanding smile…His gorgeous pink rag of a suit made a bright spot of colour against the white steps, and I thought of the night when I first came to his ancestral home, three months before. The lawn and drive had been crowded with the faces of those who guessed at his corruption- and he had stood on those steps, concealing his incorruptible dream, as he waved them good-bye.”

My PC has broken down! Doing this from my cousin's PC. I'm hoping my PC will be o.k in 1/2 days. Wish me luck everyone!

I love The Great Gatsby, and that's a fantastic review. Clearly your cousin's PC is doing something right :)

*wishing you luck*

ETA: The poem you start with is perfect - I'll have to look up D’Invilliers for myself.

Ah, Great Gatsby. One of my favorites. Might it be time for another reread? I'm not familiar with D'Invilliers either, but you've made me curious. Off to look him up...

Love your review of The Great Gatsby Porua though there is one thing i disagree on - I disliked the narrator Nick. I thought in parts he was a bit hypocritical. At one stage he expresses his disgust at how everyone uses Gatsby. However, he himself is quite happy to avail of Gatsby's hospitality, until such time as Gatsby asks him to do him a 'favour', at which stage Nick becomes irritated and uncomfortable. Nick subsequently granted the favour, but although he showed himself to be a good friend in the end, i could never get that initial wariness and unwillingness out of my head.............

other than that I love The Great Gatsby and find Gatsby to be one of the most tragic and depressing characters I've ever read!

Great review, Porua! I wasn't big on Gatsby when I read it a few years ago and have been contemplating a reread. Who knows when I'll get around to it, but now I have another way to think about it as I read it. Thanks!

How's the PC, Porua? I hope it feels better soon! :)

Hello everyone! I'm back. My PC is running again, finally. Things turned out to be more complicated than it seemed at first. And what with this terrible cold weather we are having here everything just fell apart. What should have taken about two -three days became a week. But now everything thing is alright. Luckily, I lost none of the stuff I had stored on my PC.

And thank you everyone for appreciating my Great Gatsby review. This book is one of my favorite books. I don't think my review really reflects how I truly feel about this book. I wish I could've done justice to this classic work of literature.

Cards on the Table is one of my all time favorite Agatha Christie mysteries. I usually re-read it at least once a year and so far I’ve read this book about 6-7 times. Coincidentally it was one of the favorite cases of Hercule Poirot while Capt. Hastings found it very dull (but I never did have much faith on Hastings judgment!).

It was first published in the UK by the Collins Crime Club in 1936.

Curiously, the plot of this book had been described by Poirot in The A.B.C. Murders as his idea of the perfect case.

Poirot gets invited to have dinner at the house of the rich and rather disquieting Mr. Shaitana. Mr. Shaitana is a collector of things. At the dinner Poirot meets Colonel Race, Superintendent Battle and Ariadne Oliver and also Mr. Shaitana’s collection of ‘successful’ murderers. Before the evening is concluded the host ends up getting murdered and Poirot (with a little help from his friends) tries to figure out which one of Shaitana’s collectibles turned lethal.

Cards on the Table can be called a locked room mystery. It has what I most enjoy about Christie mysteries, the psychological angle.

What I like most about this book is the setting of the murder and the impossibility of that setting. How could someone commit such a crime and get away with it (even if for a short period of time)? Then there are the twists. Even if I could spot them from some time before (but that is because I've read too many Christie books), they are still good.

This book is unique in a sense that never in any of the Poirot books that I’ve read have I come across so many recurring characters. This book has the characters of Colonel Race, Superintendent Battle and Ariadne Oliver coming all together with Poirot for the first and the last time.

This book also marks the first appearance (in a Poirot mystery) of one of my favorite Christie regulars, Mrs. Ariadne Oliver. She had formerly appeared in the book Parker Pyne Investigates in a short story titled The Case of the Discontented Soldier. Mrs. Oliver would go on to assist Poirot on several more of his cases. This in my opinion is one of the best books to feature the formidable Mrs. Oliver and the incomparable Poirot together.

Among the characters I like Rhoda Dawes. She is vivacious and full of life unlike her pretty but lifeless friend Anne Meredith. Mrs. Lorrimer is kind of frightening with her grim and practical manner. The character of Major Despard is a bit wooden.

Even though I don’t understand bridge (or any other card game for that matter), the way Poirot uses the bridge game scores to analyze the characters of the suspects is marvelous. And Christie has done a wonderful job of explaining the significance of the bridge scores that even a clueless person like me had no trouble comprehending it.

This may be a book with a card game at its centre but one doesn’t have to be a card enthusiast to love this yarn. Anyone who loves a gripping mystery can play in this game of cards.

This one is definitely going on the TBR. I went through a big Agatha Christie phase in gr. 8 and 9 because my eight grade teacher had us do a study of Murder on the Orient Express (interesting choice of book for 13 year olds, I know...) and I absolutely loved it so I started reading a bunch more of the Poirot books. Unfortunately, I can't remember the titles of any of them now! Since this is my year of rereading favourites, I was planning to reread Murder on the Orient Express this year and find some more good Poirot books. Thanks for the recommendation!

You are welcome! Glad I could contribute to your TBR list.

I read my first Christie when I was 16. My mom kept raving about Christie and (according to her she was my late grandma's favorite too) but I never listened to her. Until one day I picked up two Christie books just to see why my mom loved them so much and that was it. I fell and fell hard for the Christie mysteries. Now, she is one of my favorite authors.

Cards on the Table is one of my more memorable and enjoyable Christie mysteries. This makes me want to reread!

>27 Porua:: I don't think my review really reflects how I truly feel about this book. I wish I could've done justice to this classic work of literature.

I feel this way after almost every review I write. I'm a better reader than writer. Sometimes I just can't find those perfect words to express my feelings.

The Tale of Terror: A Study of the Gothic Romance by Edith Birkhead is considered to be an important work on Gothic literature. Edith Birkhead was a lecturer in English Literature at the University of Bristol and a Noble Fellow at the University of Liverpool.

This book, published in 1921, follows the development of the trend of writing Gothic stories, books of “horrid tales” or “tales of terror”. The book starts with Walpole's The Castle of Otronto (1764) and ends with a discussion on the Tales of Terror by American authors.

The book is divided in to twelve different chapters. I found the following discussions interesting, The Beginnings of Gothic Romance (Chapter 2 ), The Novel of Suspense: Mrs. Radcliffe (Chapter 3 ), The Oriental Tale of Terror: Beckford (Chapter 5 ), Satires on the Novel of Terror (Chapter 7 ) and American Tales of Terror (Chapter 11 ).

Birkhead obviously loved Gothic fiction. I presume she had read almost all of the books she speaks of in here. It seems as if she tried to cram in the summary and criticism of all of the books she had read in to this one book. The work is a bit too extensive. Each and every passage of each and every chapter is filled with so many references that I had a very hard time keeping up with it all.

Having said all that the book is rather informative. Although at times I felt overwhelmed by the barrage of information, it did help add quite a few new books to my TBR pile.

In all, this is a pretty comprehensive study on the beginning and progress of the Gothic Romance and also on the growth of supernatural fiction in English literature. I think, the lovers of classic books especially the admirers of the Gothic genre will quite enjoy reading it.

Looks like I'll be getting another Poirot from the library when I go there for the Pickwick Papers and Sketches by Boz. I'm thinking I'll need two to three weeks to roll through the two later DragonLance trilogies that I've been waiting a very long time to read. Something like ten years.

I’m so glad that many of you are thinking about reading/re-reading Cards on the Table. Looks like I’m helping raise more awareness about this Agatha Christie masterpiece! :-)

The Tale of Terror: A Study of the Gothic Romance sounds really interesting. I must admit, my knowledge of gothic romance comes more from Northanger Abbey than actual gothic novels, but I've been interested in them ever since (reading Northanger Abbey).

# 36 Yeah, my knowledge of Gothic novels comes mostly from reading Northanger Abbey too. It is one of my favorite Jane Austen books. But after reading The Tale of Terror: A Study of the Gothic Romance, I believe I know everything I want to know about Gothic literature. As I've said before it is a very informative book. I've recently added a few Gothic novels to my TBR list after reading this book. Let's see how it goes. :-)

The Return of the Native is a tragic novel written by Thomas Hardy. It made its first appearance in twelve monthly installments from January to December 1878 in the magazine Belgravia.

My Penguins Classics edition of The Return of the Native includes a chronology of Hardy’s life and works, a map of Hardy’s Wessex and names of its key places, Hardy’s preface to the 1912 edition, notes on the text, etc. These things helped me to better understand the book.

The book is a tangled romantic tale with the protagonists fighting with fate, circumstances and misunderstandings.

The novel takes place on Egdon Heath. Some critics consider Egdon Heath to be the protagonist of the novel, an independent entity with a life of its own. The unchanged, impassive face of the heath is what makes it comforting to its inhabitants like Thomasin and Diggory, it is what draws Clym back home and it is the heath’s immovability that drives Eustacia to the brink of destruction.

But the true catalyst of the events of the book is Eustacia Vye. It is said that Hardy had originally written the character of Eustacia as a witch (for another unfinished book). Some of the witch elements still remain in her character. Her constant roaming of the heath, her cool, detached manner and her exotic features certainly set her apart from the rest of the people on the Heath. The local people certainly consider her to be odd.

Eustacia keeps dreaming of a grand, rich, adventure filled life. She’s doomed from the start with such an unrealistic view of the world. She expects a lot from life and then when her expectations come to nothing, she becomes resentful towards the people in her life, blames her fate and ultimately begins to abhor her whole being.

Eustacia is an odd character and yet she seemed very real to me somehow. For one, I’ve seen a lot of young girls who (like Eustacia) have their heads filled with really romantic ideas about life and have a twisted and unreal view of the world. They expect their lives to turn out a certain way and when it doesn’t, they feel betrayed by everyone. And also the way Eustacia makes one mistake after another, the way her pride and anger keeps her from reconciling with people, the way her rash actions and words lead her towards her ultimate doom made her character seem very real to me. I may not like her but I certainly feel like I know and understand her.

I liked the character of Mrs. Yeobright. She is basically a good person and one of the few real, yet likeable characters of the book.

The characters of Thomasin and Wildeve are quite bland. Thomasin is nice and gentle and has a very conventional view of life. Her character is the exact opposite of the raven haired, fiery Eustacia. Wildeve, the inn-keeper with the roving eye, though much more real than any of the other male characters of the book, just didn’t seem that interesting to me. Clym, the Native of the title, didn’t leave any great impression on my mind.

Diggory Venn, the reddleman, is one strange creation. He is one of the most important characters of this story. He shows up at all the crucial junctures of the narrative and yet his personality remains in the shadow most of the time. His whole appearance is somewhat diabolical as the colour of his body is red (due to his constant proximity to reddle). But he is a good person which is in contrast to his appearance. I presume he is supposed to be somewhat of a magical being.

The Return of the Native is so very similar to another Hardy novel, Far from the Madding Crowd that it kind of surprised me. They are very similar in their story lines, characterization and narrative style.

In many ways The Return of the Native is a typical Hardy novel. One of the central themes that reoccur in so many of Hardy’s stories- the idea of people wanting to change their surroundings or of people wanting to escape their pre-destined positions in life- appears in The Return of the Native too. He seemed to be trying to tell us that ultimately those who try to fight their fate only end up getting hurt themselves. Those who do not fight the restraining bonds of life and society live happy and prosperous lives and are rewarded for their patience. Even though I do enjoy Hardy’s writing, his way of looking at life seems kind of sad and pessimistic to me.

While this book is quite enjoyable, I cannot help but feel the utter hopelessness felt by most of the characters. For this reason I don’t think I’ll be re-reading The Return of the Native any time soon.

I first read Far from the Madding Crowd some six years ago. An ‘acquaintance’ (for I cannot really call her a friend!) of mine had to do a book report on it. She really didn’t want to do it. So she grumbled and complained and grumbled and complained some more till I just had to see why she hated it so much.

And surprise, surprise! I found it to be nothing like what she had described (her exact words I believe were, “You know, some woman doing something somewhere in the mist (!) or whatever. Anyway that book gave me a headache!”). In short, I liked it much better than she did.

Six years later when Thomas Hardy became the author of the month on my Monthly Author Reads group I decided to re-read Far from the Madding Crowd. Also, the other Hardy book I read this month The Return of the Native had much in common with Far from the Madding Crowd. I wanted to see exactly what elements the two had in common.

Published in1874, Far from the Madding Crowd, takes its title from Thomas Gray's poem Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard (1751). It was Hardy’s fourth novel and his first truly successful one. This is also Hardy’s first "Wessex" novel.

Far from the Madding Crowd is the story of Bathsheba Everdene. An independent woman, she decides to manage her own affairs when she inherits a large farm from her uncle. Her tumultuous love life and life on the farm forms the core of the story.

I’ve already said in my review of The Return of the Native that many characters of it remind me of the characters of Far from the Madding Crowd. Bathsheba Everdene reminds me of Eustacia Vye while Gabriel Oak reminds me of Diggory Venn. Sergeant Troy is just another version of Wildeve.

Both Bathsheba and Eustacia are spirited, unconventional women (and both have dark locks of hair) and both of them are fools when it come to love.

I really don’t get these Hardy heroines! Bathsheba is a beautiful and financially independent woman. She has a very astute business sense. But when it comes to matters of the heart she seems so utterly unreasonable! Why does a practical woman act so erratically when it comes to her conduct with men? The way she trifles with Boldwood’s feelings, the way she acts towards Gabriel Oak and the way she is dazzled by Sergeant Troy’s flashiness are all signs of a much more irrational character than that of Bathsheba’s.

The character of Farmer Boldwood creeps me out. He makes me uncomfortable and I really don’t like him. But his final deed is what I’ve wanted to do the whole while I was reading this book. I found the character of Sergeant Troy really irritating.

Oak’s selfless character is rather unreal but I do like him for his wholesome goodness. The character of Fanny Robin is very underdeveloped and we really don’t get a sense of her grief except for in one particular chapter.

I found the “village chorus” (the general people of the village with their opinions and views on life) in Far from the Madding Crowd is far more interesting than the one in The Return of the Native.

Hardy’s love for English rural life becomes apparent in the way he describes the details of sheep rearing, crop cultivation and harvest, village fairs, drinking and singing in the old village tavern, etc. By Hardy’s lifetime these charming little rural traditions had already vanished. In a way Hardy was looking back wistfully at a more idyllic way of life.

Hardy’s writing is wonderful. The way humor is used in the narrative is very entertaining. I found the writing to be actually better than it was in The Return of the Native.

In this book again Hardy seems to be trying to tell us that a conventional way of life is far better than trying to break the mold. Everyone who deviates from what is ‘normal’ ends up crazy or dead.

But having said all that this book is much less depressing than many of the other Hardy books. And Hardy himself seems much less cynical. In my re-read of Far from the Madding Crowd, I found it to be refreshing and enjoyable. Definitely recommended.

My monthly ticker update! In January I've read 6 books. So, 44 more to go!

I really hope I'll be able to finish this 50 book challenge as my schedule will definitely keep getting busier and busier as the year progresses. And I can't read more than one book at a time. So, this might be tougher than it looks (well, for me at least!).

*skims because she has not yet read those Hardy novels* I see I better get them in the to-read list! I'm feeling very ignorant and untutored in all things Hardy-esque, as I have only read The Mayor of Casterbridge and Under the Greenwood Tree. After I have read the books, I will revisit your reviews above, Porua :)

Congrats on January's reads! You will easily make 50 on the year.

"Congrats on January's reads! You will easily make 50 on the year."

Oh I hope so! You know, I have these periods of great speed reading (I have been known to finish five books in three days). And then I have these somewhat slow periods when I drag one book around for 10-12 days. So, it all depends.

Hope you read these two Hardy books soon. Can't wait to hear your views on them! :-)

*glaring at Amy* Well, you ignoramus. What does that make me? I've listened to about half of Tess on audiobook, and never got around to finishing it. And that's my entire Hardy experience.

Actually, I realise this is the second time today I've said something to you, WW, that could be interpreted as nasty - I hope you know I'm only exhibiting my strange sense of humour and am in fact not cross at all :)

Porua, your reviews are great, particularly Return of the Native. You should put a link to them in the post so we can thumb them more easily!

I agree about the direct link to the reviews! It's the little lock icon at the bottom of the review; just right-click and copy the link location to take us right to it.

*runs away crying because Lorena has hurt her feewings dweadfuwwy* :-P

"You know, I have these periods of great speed reading.... And then I have these somewhat slow periods when I drag one book around for 10-12 days. So, it all depends." Yeah, me too. Frustrating isn't it?.

"I've listened to about half of Tess on audiobook, and never got around to finishing it. And that's my entire Hardy experience. " Er, I can spell Hardy... seriously, there are so many authors I've yet to read! Porua your reviews make me want to stop reading what I'm reading now and take on Hardy! Good reading, good reviewing!

Thank you ChocolateMuse, wisewoman and theaelizabet! I’m glad you’ve enjoyed my Hardy reviews. Next time I’ll definitely put the link to my review. Oh and thanks for the tip, Amy because I really didn’t know what that little sign meant. I really appreciate it. :-)

I’ve finally figured out what the function of that little lock icon is (once again thank you, wisewoman!). And once I learn something new I usually just go nuts with it! So here are the links to the reviews of all the books I’ve read so far this year,

The Innocence of Father Brown

http://www.librarything.com/review/51714800

The Great Gatsby

http://www.librarything.com/review/58532544

Cards on the Table

http://www.librarything.com/review/50339813

The Tale of Terror: A Study of the Gothic Romance

http://www.librarything.com/review/55336503

The Return of the Native

http://www.librarything.com/review/54419473

Far from the Madding Crowd

http://www.librarything.com/review/50320231

And before everyone thinks that I'm totally crazy I didn't go to all the books pages to get all of the links. I just got them from my Reviews page.

Glad to be of service, Porua dear! It took me awhile to learn what that lock icon was too. It's very useful :)

The Mousetrap and Selected Plays is a collection of four plays by Agatha Christie. It was published in the UK by Harper Collins in 1993.

The book contains four plays, And Then There Were None, Appointment with Death, The Hollow and The Mousetrap. All of these plays are based on some other previously published Christie work.

The first play in the book is And Then There Were None. It is a 1943 play. The play is based on the 1939 novel And Then There Were None. This three act play takes place in an Island off the coast of Devon.

This play has a different conclusion from the novel as the novel’s conclusion was deemed unusable for the stage. I haven’t read the novel so I can’t say which is better or worse but the play is good. The way the tension builds up right till the very end is quite impressive.

As for the characters this is more of an ensemble act (just the way a play should have) so no single character stands out.

Appointment with Death is a 1945 three act play. It is based on her 1938 novel Appointment with Death, featuring her famous creation Hercule Poirot.

This is not one of the usual ‘British countryside’ Christies. The play takes place in and around Petra, among its deserts and caves. The scorching heat of the desert plays a significant role here.

This adaptation is known as one of the most drastic reworking of a novel Christie ever did. Firstly, it eliminates the central figure of the story, Hercule Poirot. Secondly, it changes the identity of the killer.

When I first read this play I wasn’t particularly impressed with it. Most of it just went over my head and I found it to be somewhat dull. But now several years later I think I’m finally mature enough to get it. Now I understand how menacing the character of Mrs. Boynton actually is. The kind of hold she has over her family is just plain frightening. The rest of the Boyntons are rather uninteresting. But that is the impression (of themselves) they are supposed to give to the audience/reader as it shows how much like lifeless dummies they have become at the hands of their tormentor. The characters of Dr Gerard and Sarah King are interesting. The scenes between Alderman Higgs and Lady Westholme are fun, especially as Higgs gets to have the last word (literally).

The next play, The Hollow is a 1951 three act play based on a 1946 Hercule Poirot novel.

I’ve read The Hollow both as a novel and as a play and in my opinion it works better as a play (is it any surprise that Christie herself felt that the novel would make a good play when many of the others felt it wouldn’t?)

She also maintained that the novel, The Hollow was “ruined” by the appearance of Poirot, which is again something I totally agree with. She decided to cut him out all together from the play and rework the story accordingly.

Among the characters, Lady Angkatell stands out. She may be a bit weird but she’s definitely a very original person. I liked her. The character of Dr John Christow is very self-centered. But so is Henrietta Angkatell. With Christow it’s obvious whereas with Henrietta it is less so.

And finally, The Mousetrap. The origins of this two act play is sort of complex. It was initially a short radio play named Three Blind Mice. It was broadcast in honor of Queen Mary who was the consort of King George V and a huge admirer of Christie’s works (in fact she personally attended the performance of another Christie play, The Hollow). This version of the play is based on a short story that was based on the original radio play! The name The Mousetrap comes (somewhat surprisingly) from the play Hamlet.

(In Shakespeare's play Hamlet, "The Mousetrap" is Hamlet's answer to Claudius's inquiry about the name of the play whose prologue and first scene the court has just observed (III, ii). The play is actually The Murder of Gonzago, but Hamlet answers metaphorically, since "the play's the thing" in which he intends to "catch the conscience of the king." Source: Wikipedia)

I found Mollie and Giles Ralston to be annoying. I didn’t like them and couldn’t really connect with them. I was especially irritated when Giles began to jump to conclusions regarding Mollie’s visit to London and her relationship with Christopher. Most of the other characters are bland and wooden or stereotypical.

Having said all that I must say that the story, the central theme, the setting, the narrative and the final twist are all simply splendid! I know of no other story where the setting and the plot of the story rises above its mundane characters! Just the isolation of the Monkswell Manor and the ever increasing suspense is enough for me to say that this play is definitely worth a read!

It is interesting to see how Christie reworked her own ideas and created new entities. To me a play only manages to intensify the suspenseful elements of her stories. The Mousetrap and Selected Plays, one of my favorites and highly recommended!

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/64273537)

I was looking for a Wilkie Collins short story called The Biter Bit. I had read it years ago in a detective fiction anthology and wanted to read the story in its original context.

While looking for that I stumbled across this article in the Autumn 2005 issue of the Journal of the Short Story in English (JSSE),

http://jsse.revues.org/index436.html

It is called Failed Detectives and Dangerous Females: Wilkie Collins, Arthur Conan Doyle, and the Detective Short Story. It presents a very short analysis on the presence of women perpetrators (and their relationship with their would-be captors, the detectives) in early detective fiction. Anyone interested in mysteries/detective fiction would enjoy reading it.

And I’d have to warn you this article does contain spoilers.

It's been so long since I've read a gothic romance. I'm going to reread a few that I loved when I was in high school and see what I think of them now. The Tale of Terror: A Study of the Gothic Romance sounds like a good book to go along with my reading.

As of yet I haven’t read any real Gothic novels. My only brush with anything Gothic has been reading Northanger Abbey. I’m thinking of reading something like Nightmare Abbey, which I understand is a satire on the whole trend of writing “horrid tales”.

And regarding The Tale of Terror: A Study of the Gothic Romance it is a very informative book and it is a good read. But as I’ve mentioned earlier I sometimes felt overwhelmed by the ‘barrage’ of information.

Your reviews are marvelous. I have you starred! And I'm going to have to give Agatha Christie a whirl... don't know how I've managed to miss her so far. Is Cards on the Table a good "first Christie?"

Thank you very, very much! I’m glad that you’ve enjoyed my reviews.

As for reading Agatha Christie for the first time I myself started with one of her Miss Marple mysteries, A Murder Is Announced. The Miss Marple books are true cozy mysteries featuring a ‘deceptively’ sweet old lady, Miss Marple, as the detective. The Miss Marple mysteries are uncomplicated and very cozy. She remains my favorite. As for the Hercule Poirot mysteries, Cards on the Table is as good as any of them. It is certainly one of my all time favorite Agatha Christie books. The first Poirot mystery I ever read was Lord Edgware Dies. That's a good one too.

Edited to fix touchstone.

Thank you for the recommendations! They're going on the list.

You're welcome! :-)

Is there really a 'proper' place to start with Poirot? The Mysterious Affair at Styles is her first book, Poirot is a veteran detective and is well known to a couple of the characters. Holmes is easy. Start with A Study in Scarlet where Watson meets Holmes and after that the order isn't very critical; with the exception of the very last few from the Casebook. Those aren't even 'written' by Watson anyway. Other than the whole Rickenbach Falls encounter with Moriarty and its repercussions the stories are more or less jumpy and disorganized anyway.

Also, I'm going to read some of Robert Graves here shortly, after this book on Robert the Bruce that has sat on my reading table for close to a year. Graves is the only poet that I've read that is easy and I don't have to shift into some odd mental gear to try and make sense of it. Like Milton - yikes! After his Greek Myths, I'd like to check out some of his other work, be it poetry or his historical based prose. Any advice would be appreciated. I really need to truss up my english level a tad to fully appreciate the many volumes of Tolkien errata that so is very dense and complex, and Mr. Graves is just the guy to help based on what little of his work that I have read. Plus, the two are almost exact contemporaries and both WWI vets who had traumatic experiences.

# 54 & 56 Oh and I forgot to mention that Lord Edgware Dies was published under the title Thirteen at Dinner in the US. So, you might want to look for that if you cannot find it as Lord Edgware Dies.

# 58 Yeah, you’re right DP. There is really no proper place to start Poirot. Poirot is Poirot whatever the book maybe. That is why I said that Cards on the Table is as good as any of them.

And I read the Bantam edition of the Complete Sherlock Holmes mysteries which were pretty much chronologically arranged. But again as you say the order isn't very critical. Start with A Study in Scarlet where Holmes and Watson meet for the first time and the rest don’t matter that much. I’m not really that in to the whole Moriarty thing as Doyle just got tired and wanted Holmes to just go away from his life by trying to kill him off. Except for that awesome ‘doppelganger at the window’ thing in The Adventure of the Empty House in The Return of Sherlock Holmes I didn’t really enjoy the Moriarty parts one bit.

Regarding Robert Graves I’ve never read any of his poetry but I heard his memoir Goodbye to All That being read on the BBC radio show Off the Shelf. It was rather entertaining as far as I remember. I mean to read the book some day.

Fair enough and thanks.

You're welcome, DP!

David Copperfield (or The Personal History, Adventures, Experience and Observation of David Copperfield the Younger of Blunderstone Rookery (which he never meant to publish on any account) by Charles Dickens first appeared in the form of a serial and was later published as a book in the year 1850. It is considered to be an autobiographical account of Dickens' own life. It was also Dickens' personal favourite among his own works.

David Copperfield is the life story of, well, David Copperfield. It chronicles his life from his birth through his thorny childhood and early adulthood to his triumphant success in later life.

This is a very, very long book (about a thousand pages to be exact). I breezed through Copperfield’s childhood but faltered once he reached adulthood.

Now, please pardon me if I don’t see what is great about this novel. Sure it is Dickens and I do love his works. But this is by far my least favorite of his books.

The narrative, though sparkling during Copperfield’s childhood, becomes dry and dreary once he reaches adulthood.

The central characters of Copperfield and Agnes are rather bland. The way Copperfield keeps calling Agnes “Sister” all the time was meaningless.

Among the other characters Dora Spenlow has got to be one of the most annoying literary characters ever to exist! The way she pouts and shakes those curls of hers! I could just gag! Is this meant to be cute, innocent? All I know is that every time she opens her mouth I feel like hitting myself! The only redeeming quality she seems to possess is her lovely looks and her lovely locks! Well, at least it is acknowledged that she’s silly and is a wrong match for a serious man but to me she seemed beyond silly.

The Murdstones are cruel just as literary villains are supposed to be. They are not unusual but they are disturbing. But the other villain of the book, the diabolical Uriah Heep, is very strange. Everything from his appearance, his constant reference to himself as being “Umble” (Humble) and his obvious hypocrisy is mesmerizing. Another strange character was Miss Dartle. She is quite frightening and she did make me uneasy with her sudden out bursts.

Uriah Heep is a nasty character to be sure. But did he have to be so revolting looking? I mean a man can be evil and be the most charming, most handsome man ever! I felt that too much time is spent discussing his repellent looks than discussing his villainous nature.

At the other end of the spectrum we have Steerforth. In my opinion he’s as bad as Uriah. He’s heartless and selfish but he’s excused for his bad behavior because he’s supposed to have been smothered and pampered by his mother and is rich, charming and handsome. His good looks and charming manners are mentioned many, many times in the course of the narrative. Sure people are “disappointed” by his behaviour but he’s never really seriously reproached for his deed. Of course he’s not to be totally blamed for what happened and he does pay dearly in the end but to me his self-serving and careless attitude is hardly forgivable. Copperfield’s unhealthy obsession with Steerforth is one of the more disturbing aspects of the story.

In short, a lot of importance is placed upon good looks. Only a few exceptions are made regarding this, for example, the excellent Miss Mowcher, a character I really admired, is physically unattractive but is extremely good and brave. And Mr. Murdstone is a good looking but stone hearted man.

What was the point of the whole Little Emily track and the old doctor and his wife track? As far as the Little Emily part goes I think perhaps like Hardy, Dickens wanted to show how people might get hurt when they try to fight their fate. People should be happy with the position society has chosen for them and ask for no more- seems to be the message. As for the old doctor and his wife part, I really don’t see the point of it.

I admired the character of Aunt Betsy. Her eccentricities, her tender devotion towards the weak and the helpless made her one of the more interesting female characters of the book. Mr. Dick is another one of the remarkable characters. I really liked the characters of Mr. Micawber (and not to mention his family) and Traddles. The role they play in the whole Uriah Heep situation is just superb!

The chapter called Tempest (Chapter- LV) is excellent! It is one of the most convincing portrayals of a storm that I’ve ever read. It was almost as if I could feel the wind rage and listen to it howling and taste the salt water of the sea! Such wonderful writing!

David Copperfield is a classic and I’m glad that I read it. But it certainly falls short of my expectations. Read only if you’re an ardent admirer of Dickens’ work and of classics in general (as I am). Otherwise, not recommended.

(The link to my review is, http://www.librarything.com/review/64274093)

58: Milton's not *that* scary! I recently read Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained and it wasn't that bad once I got into it. I'm sure I missed a lot of allusions and themes and whatnot, but that's okay. I got the main gist, enjoyed the story and language, and now I can say I've read Milton :)

Uriah Heep is actually one of my favorite characters from DC — not because he is likable (because he certainly is not), but because he is just so over the top. I know people who are a little like him, but he is himself to the nth degree. That false humility, that scheming servility, that insidious, creeping, crawly-ness of him — ugh!

And you know, I never was a big fan of Mr. Micawber. To be quite frank, I wanted to shake him. Lazy man! It's either G. K. Chesterton or Dorothy Sayers — or perhaps Sayers quoting Chesterton — who criticizes Dickens' manipulation of Micawber's character to create a happy ending for him. Spoilers follow It just doesn't ring true to his character that has been developed all throughout the story that he would suddenly become a hardworking, industrious leader in a new country once he just got out of England. I have to agree; it just isn't believable. Whichever critic it was, Sayers or Chesterton, says that Dickens allowed his own fondness for the character to overpower his artistic sense and give him a happy ending that is completely uncharacteristic.

# 64 Totally agree about Heep. He's so fascinating and at the same time so repulsive. Ugh- indeed!

Yeah, Mr. Micawber is irresponsible. But he's good and for me that's all that matters. I can stand irresponsibility. But one thing I can't stand is foolishness. If a character acts like a 'dumb doll' (ex. Dora in David Copperfield and Eve Neil from The Emperors Snuff-Box) that is when I get all 'wanting to shake' that character.

Besides it is mentioned several times during the course of the narrative that Mr. Micawber is extremely efficient and hard working when it comes to working for the benefit of 'other' people but when it comes to himself or his own family he's just so clueless! I can totally understand that. That is why he's so successful at both giving Heep his just deserts and becoming a leader at the new country.

The same goes for Traddles actually. He's very successful when he's working for others but he's own life (well, the early parts of it anyway) is in such a mess!

Edited to fix typo.

I've tried to read DC a few times and never got through it - congratulations for finishing! Another great review!

# 66 I always (well, almost always) finish what I start. As a result I've ended up finishing some pretty horrendous books. Believe me, David Copperfield is not the worst I've managed to finish. And thank you! It feels good when my friends praise my little efforts at writing book reviews!

The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets Nest (or Luftslottet som sprängdes in Swedish) by Stieg Larsson is the third and final book of his ‘Millennium Trilogy’. Larsson wrote novels for his own pleasure and made little or no effort to publish them. He intended to write a total of ten books about the exploits of Lisbeth Salander, the ‘Girl’ of the title and Mikael Blomkvist, the womanizing, middle aged reporter. After his death three complete books, an unfinished fourth book and the outlines of the fifth and sixth book were found. As the proposed ten books were never written the first three books have now become known as the ‘Millennium Trilogy’. The first two books of this trilogy are The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo and The Girl who Played with Fire.

I read the first two books last year (my reviews for those are here and here) and didn’t particularly like them. Then why did I go through all the trouble of reading this? Simply because I have this compulsion to finish what I start. I couldn’t abandon the trilogy after reading the first two books. So, here I am with the final installment of the saga.

The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets Nest is definitely NOT a stand alone book and that is not just because it’s the part of a trilogy. For someone to understand what’s going on in The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets Nest, they’ll have to read The Girl who Played with Fire. The narrative starts right where The Girl who Played with Fire leaves off.

While the first book reads like a murder mystery and the second one reads like a crime thriller the third book is like a spy thriller dealing with espionage and relics of the Cold war. I wonder what the rest of the books might have been like given that the first three have very similar yet different style of narratives. But that doesn’t mean this book is very different from the first two. The same characters reappear and their distinctive traits remain.

One thing I felt with The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets Nest was that the bad guys in this were no match for the good guys. I mean to start off with there are a lot more good people in this story than bad. Secondly, the good guys seem to plan and plot way faster and more efficiently than the villains making them (the villains) look like sitting ducks. I for one cannot enjoy a good thriller without some really menacing bad guys giving the good guys a tough time. That is what makes the victory of good over evil sweet.

The editing is actually a little bit better than The Girl who Played with Fire. But I still have the same complaints I had the last time. It is still full of descriptions of what the characters are eating, what they are wearing, etc.

And once again every living, breathing female in the book seems to want to sleep with the irresistible Blomkvist even though several of them admit to his being old and out of shape. Seriously, what is with that? It’s like this, fast paced action for 50-100 pages or so and add one sex scene with Blomkvist and some lady, again some 50-100 pages of action and we’re back to Blomkvist and his adventures with some woman. Boring and pointless! The same goes with Salander’s life too. Why does it matter who she sleeps with when it has nothing to do with the main plot of the story? My guess would be it’s just to add some spice to the story. Not that the story actually needed any spicing up, it is pretty darn fast paced as it is.

As the author died without finishing his work, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets Nest does feel a little unfinished. But not so much that it hurts the quality of the book or the trilogy. This book is what it is. Not a great work of literature but entertaining. Its worth one read at least but only if you’ve read the first two parts of the trilogy and are a fan of thrillers in general.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/56514744)

What a great review! Thanks for explaining the history of the "series". I know that a lot of people have been reading these books, but didn't know much else about them. Maybe I'll give them a try someday (I love a good mystery), but sounds like I can place them toward the bottom of the pile for now.

"Simply because I have this compulsion to finish what I start." Yeah, me too. That's a good enough reason not to read the first one.

Wow some wonderful reviews and to be honest I didn't read them all just because some of them are books I plan to read and also the thread was too long to read all at once.

Agatha Christie is an author I just read last year for the first time. I loved the books that I read and have supsequently purchased some of the books and will hopefully be reading them soon.

I did not realize that The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was part of a Trilogy. I will have to check those books out next time I am at the library or book store.

Very interesting, Porua! I didn't read the entire review since I'm only just now reading the first book, but I didn't know that there were 10 books intended. What a shame that Larsson passed away before he was able complete the series.

Ugh, I don't think I'll ever read Larsson. You say he wasn't interested in publishing and wrote his books solely for his own pleasure? Well, no wonder the lead character is getting into bed with some woman every fifty pages. It's pure wish fulfillment a lá Twilight!

Thank you for reading my review everyone . I read The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo because well, a lot of people seem to love it. After reading it I found I didn’t care much about it but by then the whole “compulsion” thing set in. I wouldn’t really recommend this trilogy to anyone as a mystery trilogy. It is more like thriller than mystery. And definitely not recommended to anyone who has does not feel comfortable (just like I’m not) with a whole lot of talk about sex and having sex and sexual orientations, etc, etc.

A lot of people don’t seem to be aware that The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is the part of a trilogy let alone a proposed series of ten books. I explained the history of the series because without that the whole trilogy especially the ending may seem a bit abrupt and unstructured. Even though I don’t think it really damages the trilogy in any way but it just feels a tad disorganized.

I hope you enjoy Agatha Christie as much as I do, crazy4reading! I always run to her whenever I’m feeling down. For instance, right now I’m going to read something by Christie because after reading someone like Larsson I need to have my palate cleansed. That’s what I did last year too after finishing the first two books.

“ It's pure wish fulfillment a lá Twilight!”

That’s what I think too, Amy. Larsson was a journalist who worked in a magazine that had financial troubles just like his protagonist Blomkvist in the book. I think this was his way of living out his fantasies. Reminds me of someone else I read for the first time last year. Remember my tirade against The Time Travelers Wife? Well, atleast the prose of Larsson’s books are better than that.

Stupid touchstones!

ohhh nooo... I have to read the girl with the dragon tattoo for my F2F book group. You mean we're reading a Twilight equivalent! Nooooooo!!!

Porua, I'm reading Cat among the Pigeons at the moment, it's a great Christie, though with a wildly unbelievable premise (revolutions, stolen jewels etc) - but it's set mainly at an English girl's school and is a good read.

I have about 40 pages left to go in Dragon Tattoo and I'm totally underwhelmed. I was really into it in the early chapters but that didn't last. Still debating whether or not to continue with the trilogy.

Two negative comments about The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo from people whose opinions I trust. Off the wishlist it goes. Actually, I had it from the library awhile ago and quit reading after about 30 pages or so. I just couldn't get into it, and had too much other book pressure at the time. It's with great relief that I can cross that one and the following two in the trilogy off my list. Thanks, Porua and Andrea.

I love when negative reviews give me the excuse I want to pitch something :-P

Hey guys! Been really busy these past few days and to top it all off was running a high fever. Still dealing with a bout of nasty cough and a desire to crawl in to bed (and stay there!). On the bright side have read quite a few books. Will be reviewing them soon.

# 74 Oh Cat among the Pigeons is one of my favorites, ChocolateMuse! I really enjoyed the whole English girl's school setting of the story with all the teachers and the girls and everything. My sister (who’s not a big bookworm like me and reads only a few books a year) gave it a thumbs up too.

And regarding the Millennium trilogy, always glad to be of help to you guys (whether to help add or delete books from anyone’s TBR list/ pile/ mountain!).

Boy do I hate being sick. I hope you get over it soon. Normally, I'd recommend a few belts of brandy, but that suggestion would fall on deaf ears so never mind. Orange juice is pretty close to a miracle cure though, even if it just keeps you hydrated.

Things are pretty quiet around here without Billiejean, aren't they?

Feel better soon, Porua! Vitamin C and zinc are your friends :)

Thank you, DirtPriest and Amy! I'm feeling much better now but I'm still having these horrible coughing fits!

Oh DP you with your ale and beer and brandy! But yeah Orange juice is a life saver!

Hello everyone! Here are my reviews of the books I read during the last week of February.

I have read and collected all the Miss Marple books that exist. But till now I haven’t added them to my collection here at LT. One of the reasons is that I’m lazy (I’ve already added all the volumes of the Marple omnibuses. Do I want to add all my individual books as well?...) and another reason is that I’ve been waiting to re-read all of them chronologically (as I do in every few years) and go on adding them as I read them.

First up is The Thirteen Problems (also known as The Tuesday Club Murders). The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/57474740

Next is another of the Miss Marple mysteries, The Murder at the Vicarage.

One more review to come. Still working on that one so will post it later.

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times...”,

This is arguably the most famous opening line ever written. It has since become something of an iconic statement and somewhat of a cliché.

First published in weekly installments in Dickens' literary periodical All the Year Round in 1859, A Tale of Two Cities, remains one of the most popular novels of all time and also one of the most frequently quoted.

The book is divided in to three parts, Book the First: Recalled to Life, Book the Second: The Golden Thread and Book the Third: The Track of a Storm.

Set before and during the turbulent times of the French revolution, A Tale of Two Cities follows the lives of several characters and the two great cities of London and Paris that are inexorably a part of these lives. It is also a story of love and sacrifice.

A Tale of Two Cities gives a vivid portrayal of the harrowing lives of the French peasantry and the cruelty of the French aristocracy. But after the revolution it is the oppressed who become the oppressors and show equal cruelty to their former exploiters. The book also portrays the social injustices that exited in England of that time as a kind of a parallel to France.

All of Dickens’ novels feature so many characters that it is hard to discuss each and every one of them. A Tale of Two Cities is no exception. The main protagonists Charles Darnay and Lucie Manette are supposed to be good and are good to the point of being sickeningly sugary. Dickens’ love for golden curls and blue eyes raises its ugly head once more in the form of the beautiful Lucie Manette. The fact that she’s beautiful is pointed out to us many times.

Dr. Alexandre Manette with his difficult past is an interesting character. His mental affliction that comes from his past hardships and his subsequent relapses in to it is interesting to read. But his swift recovery simply through his daughter’s goodness seems a little unbelievable. Mr. Lorry, though an important character, never becomes fully developed and is dull.

Ernest Defarge is another dull character. But his wife Therese Defarge, an unforgiving and bitter woman, is really chilling. Her thirst for vengeance and the cool and methodical way she sets out to destroy everyone is disturbing to say the least.

Miss Pross I must say managed to surprise me. She seemed like one of those devoted old guard types but her final act manages to distinguish her from the rest. Mr. Stryver is an annoying character and he is supposed to be just that, annoying.

But for me one of the most memorable characters in A Tale of Two Cities and indeed in all the books that I’ve ever read remains-Sydney Carton. He is bright and intelligent and yet is a deeply unhappy man. He’s an alcoholic and a pessimist. He’s supposed to be a damaged person, he himself believes he is beyond redemption. But we still see that underneath it all he is good man and is capable of great deeds.

Even after so many re-reads, every time I reach the third part of the book ( Book the Third: The Track of a Storm), when the shadows that have been gathering around the leads become more apparent, I start to feel anxious.

The writing is very good. One of Dickens’ best according to me. But it is a lot less humorous than many of Dickens’ other books. That’s because the book deals with such sad and tragic circumstances it is nearly impossible to be funny about it.

A Tale of Two Cities remains a sentimental favorite. Sure as I’ve grown older the flaws in the narrative and the characterization have become more apparent. But pardon me for being stubbornly faithful to it when I say that I don’t care about the flaws at all!

As I said at the beginning of my review A Tale of Two Cities has arguably the most famous opening lines ever written but for me the closing lines of the book which come from the character of Sydney Carton hold a certain poignancy,

“ It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known. ”

Truly touching and heart warming, every time.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/50367899)

But pardon me for being stubbornly faithful to it when I say that I don’t care about the flaws at all!

Ha, I am totally with you there! :D

I think I have been neglecting Christie of late. Will have to rectify that.

>83 Porua:: I'm one of the few people I know who enjoyed the books they were forced to read in high school, A Tale of Two Cities being on of them. It would be interesting to see how it would stand the test of time.

Wow, lots of great reviews :)

The Thirteen Problems is one of the few Christies I've only read once, and that quite a long time ago. Hmmm, I have a delicious re-read coming up!

Have you seen the adaptation of Murder at the Vicarage with Geraldine McEwan? It's a fairly good one, and visually quite beautiful.

Congrats on your well-deserved hot review for Tale of Two Cities! I've tried reading it a few times and couldn't get into it. Must try again some time... but I think I've got some inherent problem where I can't enjoy the Victor Hugo / Dickens type of book... though I listened to Pickwick and liked it very much.

# 84 “I think I have been neglecting Christie of late. Will have to rectify that.”

Oh no neglecting our mutual favorite! Hurry up and read/re-read some Christie, ASAP!
;-)

# 85 Would you believe, I read A Tale of Two Cities way before high school? I think, I was 11-12 years old.

# 86 I’ve re-read The Thirteen Problems so many times that I’ve lost count. I keep going back to Christie for comfort again and again.

I don’t really watch any of the Miss Marple or Christie TV/ movie adaptations so no haven’t seen the McEwan version of The Murder at the Vicarage.

“I've tried reading it a few times and couldn't get into it. Must try again some time... but I think I've got some inherent problem where I can't enjoy the Victor Hugo / Dickens type of book... though I listened to Pickwick and liked it very much.”

That’s o.k. Not all of us enjoy reading the same books and if you don’t enjoy something you don’t have to force yourself to read it. I mean I don’t enjoy reading most of the modern books people here on LT seem to enjoy. I really wish I could join them and share their enthusiasm but I just can’t. But I’m with you on The Pickwick Papers. I like it very much too. In fact it is one of my all time top 10 favorite books.

And thank you all for reading my review of A Tale of Two Cities. Getting a hot review feels great!

Thomas Love Peacock was well known for writing satires. Nightmare Abbey is perhaps the best known among all of Peacock’s works. It was published in the year 1818.

Nightmare Abbey is a satire on the trend of writing Gothic fiction and the Romantic Movement in English literature.

It is the story of Christopher Glowry and his son Scythrop Glowry. They reside in the aforementioned Nightmare Abbey. Christopher Glowry is a melancholic person and surrounds himself with people with melancholic names and/or faces. His son Scythrop dabbles with bizarre and complex philosophical ideas and wants to change the world, though he does not know how he’ll actually mange to do that. His philosophical ambitions are constantly interrupted by his rather troublesome habit of falling in love. The constant barrage of visitors who file in and out of Nightmare Abbey doesn’t help matters either.

Peacock pokes fun at his contemporary poets and novelists for their obsession with everything that’s depressing. Mr. Hilary, who is essentially a representative of Peacock’s voice in the story, calls this a “conspiracy against cheerfulness”. For example, Mr. Flosky proclaims about modern literature,

“Very true, sir. Modern literature is a north-east wind--a blight of the human soul. I take credit to myself for having helped to make it so. The way to produce fine fruit is to blight the flower. You call this a paradox. Marry, so be it. Ponder thereon.”

The whole chapter in which Marionetta tries to get Mr. Flosky to divulge information about Scythrop’s mysterious behavior is actually an example of Peacock’s criticism of contemporary philosophical thoughts. Thoughts that centered around the obscure and the complex. The round about way Mr. Flosky goes about answering (more like not answering) her questions is frustrating to say the least.

Most of the characters are said to have been based upon Peacock’s own circle of friends and acquaintances. Scythrop Glowry was apparently based on Peacock’s friend poet Percy Bysshe Shelley. Mr. Ferdinando Flosky is supposed to be a parody of Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Mr. Toobad is said to have been based upon J. F. Newton and Mr. Listless upon Lumley Skeffington, both friends of Shelley’s and Mr. Cypress on Lord Byron.

None of the characters stand out as they are used as mere mouth pieces to voice Peacock’s opinions about everything.

Thoughts and beliefs seem to matter much more to Peacock than personal interactions among his characters and human emotions. Lengthy conversations are a part of the narrative. Some of it, I dare say, is very funny. But the action, of what little action there is, is much funnier than that. I wish there was more of that (action) in Nightmare Abbey. But of course, Peacock’s goal was to satirize the contemporary literary practices and philosophical ideas, not to write a rollicking comedy just to entertain us.

The book is so full of references to the literature, philosophy and politics of that time that it has now become outdated.

But having said that some parts of the book are simply hilarious. I actually laughed out loud several times.

For instance about Scythrop’s education Peacock says,

“When Scythrop grew up, he was sent, as usual, to a public school, where a little learning was painfully beaten into him, and from thence to the university, where it was carefully taken out of him; and he was sent home like a well-threshed ear of corn, with nothing in his head: having finished his education to the high satisfaction of the master and fellows of his college,...”

And there is this amusing passage about the habit of reading and college education,

“He had some taste for romance reading before he went to the university, where, we must confess, in justice to his college, he was cured of the love of reading in all its shapes; and the cure would have been radical, if disappointment in love, and total solitude, had not conspired to bring on a relapse.”

And after becoming disillusioned with love and life in general, our hero contemplates suicide and has the following exchange with his butler, who is aptly named Raven,

“Shall I bring your dinner here?'

'Yes.'

'What will you have?'

'A pint of port and a pistol.'(14)

'A pistol!'

'And a pint of port. I will make my exit like Werter...

... 'Yes; and the dinner is getting cold. There is a time for every
thing under the sun. You may as well dine first, and be miserable
afterwards.'
'True, Raven. There is something in that. I will take your advice:
therefore, bring me----'

'The port and the pistol?'

'No; the boiled fowl and Madeira.”

If I go on quoting passages that I found funny I would probably end up quoting nearly half of the book. In fact I’m not quoting the passage which made me laugh the hardest because it is a rather large one.

Nightmare Abbey does seem pretty dated. Some of the rather lengthy commentary on philosophy and life and society are frankly boring. But Peacock’s sharp wit and funny characters caught in comically dramatic situations more than make up for that. Besides the book is so short that it ends almost before it begins. Recommended for being (for the most part) a very, very funny and quick read.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/55511723)

Another great review! You're just churning them out of late. I like the bits you quoted. The first one sounds very familiar (and hilariously true)...

And yes, I'm planning on a Christie for my next mystery! :)

Thank you for your compliment, Amy! Yeah, I've been reading books at great speed and writing reviews for them but actually I'm a little behind on my reviews. I've read at least four more books that I haven't written the reviews for yet. So, maybe I should churn a little faster! ;-)

And hooray for Christie as your next mystery!

For The Blood Is The Life And Other Stories is a collection of horror/supernatural short stories by F. Marion Crawford.

F. Marion Crawford (1854-1909) was an American writer. He wrote mostly romantic and historical novels set in Italy. But along with the romantic novels he wrote many weird and fantastic tales. Many of his short stories are considered classics of the horror genre.

I had read two of his stories, The Upper Berth and The Screaming Skull and had been looking for a comprehensive collection of his weird tales. After a lot of searching I finally found, For The Blood Is The Life And Other Stories.

For The Blood Is The Life And Other Stories contains eight of his best horror short stories, one of which, The King's Messenger, is rarely found in many of Crawford’s collections.

The first story, The Dead Smile is macabre and very gothic. The whole build up is good, very creepy and morbid. But the conclusion seemed just plain weird to me.

The Screaming Skull is scary. I first read it as a part of an anthology. I was fairly scared as it was kind of late and I was alone in my room. The second reading was not as scary as the first one but still pretty creepy.

Man Overboard! is very, very overdrawn. Within the first few pages I saw what it was all about. It just went on and on while the solution is just so obvious.

The eponymous, For the Blood Is the Life manages to build up the suspense but the end kind of just peters out.

The Upper Berth I read as the part of another anthology. It is fairly well written and entertaining. One of the better written stories of the collection. In fact it was a favorite of the author H. P. Lovecraft’s, who praised it as “Crawford's weird masterpiece ...”.

By the Waters of Paradise has a Gothic setting but has a rather surprising ending. For some reason I felt faintly irritated by it.

The Doll's Ghost, a supernatural tale, managed to really touch my heart. It is by far the best written story of the book. It is one of my favorites.

Frankly I don’t get the last story of the collection called The King's Messenger. What is this story all about? I’ve yet to figure out.

Short stories, especially of the suspense or horror genre, should be short and should end abruptly, leaving the reader shocked and the ending should be left open. Quite a few stories in For The Blood Is The Life And Other Stories do not follow this rule.

At least three of the stories The Screaming Skull, Man Overboard!, The Upper Berth are full of maritime details. Much of Man Overboard! will seem particularly incomprehensible to any ordinary person. Only people familiar with sailing will probably understand it.

But this book is still worth a read. At least two of the stories, The Screaming Skull andThe Upper Berth, are truly classics of the weird tale genre. The Doll's Ghost is incredibly heart warming.

The fans of horror, supernatural stories and of Gothic literature will enjoy this collection. Recommended.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/54874730)

You're always mentioning classic authors I've never heard of! I'm not usually a fan of horror by itself; if there are horror elements, they need to be woven in with other things. But I'm glad you enjoyed these!

And yes, Christie will be my next mystery :). I'm still deciding which one. Oh, and my mom and I were out booksaling Saturday and I picked up Elephants Can Remember for her. I don't think she has read anything by Christie before.

Porua, Nightmare Abbey sounds terrific. I'd never heard of it! Thanks for the review. I'm adding the book to my TBR.

# 92 Yeah, I have this habit of reading books by authors no one seems to have ever heard of around LT. I’ve written the first review of quite a few books. There are some books I own that are not in the library of any other member here on LT and some others which I share with only one other member. I really hope more people discover these authors through my efforts as I like to share the things I like with my friends.

Hmm... Elephants Can Remember is not one of my favorites. But I do hope she enjoys it more than I did.

# 93 I’m very glad to help add Nightmare Abbey to your TBR list, theaelizabet! I had fun while reading it. Hope you enjoy it too. And like I said I seem to be reading and introducing forgotten authors all the time. I’m only too happy to be able to do it!

Yeah, Elephants Can Remember is one of the few Christies I put down and never finished.

Hi Porua! :)

I liked it, but probably because it was one of my earlier Christies and I was as yet innocent of the devious twists and tricks of the genre. I've heard others say it's a lesser mystery, and perhaps on rereading it I would agree.

But there we are at the sale and it's the only Christie in sight. And it's bag day. Just can't help myself! :)

The one Christie I've put down halfway through was Passenger to Frankfurt. It was dreadful.

I’ve never left a Christie unfinished but that probably has something to do with my obsession with finishing what I started. Some earlier Christie books like Murder on the Links and The Mystery of the Blue Train I had a trying time finishing. But my most disliked Christie mysteries come from the latter Christie books. Elephants Can Remember, Hallowe'en Party and The Clocks are my least favorite Christies. Even my favorite Mrs. Oliver couldn’t save the first two (and notice how all of these books feature Poirot whom I enjoy but not as much as Miss Marple). Haven’t read Passenger to Frankfurt because I’ve read very few non-series Christies.

I’m a little behind on posting my reviews of all the books, well mostly re-reads of Miss Marple mysteries with a little George Bernard Shaw thrown in, I’ve been reading. The two Miss Marple mysteries are The Body in the Library and The Moving Finger.

Plays Pleasant, published in 1898, contains four of Bernard Shaw’s so-called pleasant or comic plays. The plays are Arms and the Man, Candida, The Man of Destiny and You Never Can Tell. He named it Plays Pleasant in order to set it apart from his previous collection of plays, Plays Unpleasant.

The first play of the book, Arms and the Man, takes its title from the opening words of Virgil’s Aeneid,

“Arma virumque cano” (of arms and the man I sing)

This was one of Shaw’s first commercially successful plays.

Arms and the Man is essentially a parody about the romantic ideas about love and the realities of life. In fact, this particular theme reappears in all of the plays in this book. It also pokes fun at the idea of heroism and the realities of war.

I must confess that as I’ve grown older I’ve liked the characters of Arms and the Man less and less. All of the characters are pretending to be something or the other. Raina Petkoff is trying to be a romantic heroine pining away for her fiancé to return triumphant from war. Sergius Sranoff, a reckless and conniving young man, pretending to be a true noble hero. Major and Mrs. Petkoff trying to be genteel while in reality they are crude common people with a lot of money. Louka trying desperately to better her social position. Nicola being polite and proper, without really being sincere about his intentions.

Of all the characters in the play I like the character of Bluntschli the best. He’s the only character who’s not pretending to be something he’s not.

Arms and the Man is entertaining but all of the characters are so insincere that after a while it gets really trying.

The second play, Candida, revolves around the character of Candida, an intelligent and engaging woman who is also a devoted wife and a mother.

The change that the characters of Reverend Morell, Candida’s husband and Eugene Marchbanks, her young admirer, goes through is remarkable. I don’t quite see the purpose of the character of Mr. Burgess other than to provide some comic relief.

The theme of the absurdity of romantic ideas about love and the realities of life is visited once more in Candida.
Candida is by far my favorite play of the book. It has refreshing storyline for the Victorian era in which this play belongs to. A new twist to the then conventional ideas of freedom, marriage and romance. The way Candida explains her point of view and very casually takes her over confident spouse down a notch makes for a good read.

The next play is a piece of historical fiction called The Man of Destiny. It features the real historical figure of Napoleon Bonaparte along with three fictional characters.

It is a short piece of work. To me this play seemed the least eager to prove a point. It is a pretty good bit of historical fiction and I quite enjoyed it.

The last play, You Never Can Tell, is a sort of a comedy of error featuring rather serious issues of marriage, separation, custody of children, money, etc. As in Arms and the Man and Candida, the debate about the true nature of love and marriage and the traditional role of man and woman in it are once again discussed. The tone of the play is deceptively light while dealing with some very prickly issues.

Dr. Valentine annoyed me. Falling in love at first sight with the beautiful but utterly unsuitable Miss Clandon and then being afraid at the prospect of actually getting married to her exasperated me to no end. The only characters I enjoyed are young Dolly Clandon, Mr. Bohun and Walter, the waiter.

I don’t like romance and most of these plays, especially You Never Can Tell, has quite a bit of that. Shaw’s idea of romance frankly irritates me. All that flirting and trying to gain advantage over each other as if they were enemies makes me really annoyed.

I don’t know what it is but something about this play makes me uncomfortable. Perhaps it is Mr. Crampton’s rough aggressiveness and bitter loneliness or perhaps it is the rather inhuman way all of his children behave. In fact their mother, Mrs. Clandon, who has supposedly made them that way is far more like a human being than any of them are.

Let me make it very clear that these plays are not light works of comedy meant to be enjoyed in a frivolous way. Yes, parts of them are certainly very witty and they are meant to entertain us but they are also very much intended to aggravate us. This is what George Bernard Shaw was famous for, satirizing social and political problems with a biting wit. And aggravate he does. But he also does not fail to entertain. Recommended but only if one is not afraid of reading classics (or plays for that matter).

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/57953845)

Sleeping Murder by Agatha Christie was first published in the UK by the Collins Crime Club in 1976 and in the US by Dodd, Mead and Company later that same year.

Christie wrote Sleeping Murder during World War II, most likely in 1940. The book remained sealed in a bank vault for the next thirty six years. The last Miss Marple novel Christie wrote was Nemesis.It was published in the year 1971. When she realized she may not be able to write any more books, Christie agreed to publish Sleeping Murder in 1976 but died before its publication.

I place this book in my chronological (story wise, not in order of publication) reading of the Marple books after The Moving Finger and before A Murder Is Announced. My reason for doing so is that a certain piece of information about the case in The Moving Finger is mentioned in Sleeping Murder and as A Murder Is Announced wasn’t published until 1950.

Gwen, a young newly wed woman, knows she has come home the moment she steps into that beautiful house called Hillside. What a wonderful place to settle down with her husband, Giles, now that they have decided to stay in England permanently. But soon after she moves in a feeling of irrational fear starts to engulf her. Is Gwen going crazy or is Hillside haunted? Are the ominous visions that rise before her eyes just hallucinations or are they glimpses of the house’s past?

This story has what I love most about Agatha Christie books, the psychological angle. The theme of jealousy and suspicion runs through Sleeping Murder.

The first time I read Sleeping Murder was on a rainy afternoon. I was alone in the house. The sky was overcast. Even though it was only 4 o’ clock in the afternoon it had already grown dark outside and the only sounds I could hear was the rain falling incessantly and the occasional thunder. I got to the part where Gwen, the female protagonist of the story, is at the theatre and suddenly the power of my house went out, leaving me in total darkness. Now, I’m not someone who is easily scared but at that moment I felt chills down my spine. And yet I couldn’t stop reading it.

I don’t know if it is the after effect of that first experience or the book itself has something to do with it but there is something definitely ominous and creepy about this story. Reading it always makes me feel uncomfortable. Like Miss Marple says in the book,

“It was real evil that was in the air...”

Miss Marple is once again marvelous. Her insightful opinions about the human nature come in to play once again. Her philosophy of distrusting everyone is expressed well by herself,

“It really is very dangerous to believe people. I never have for years.”

The protagonists, Giles and Gwen are very much like any other young couple in any of Agatha Christie’s books. Giles, the dashing and enthusiastic but rather short sighted young man and Gwen, the competent and modern but very feminine young women. Nothing about them really stands out but they are not unpleasant either.

Among the other characters Walter Fane, J J Afflick, Mr. and Mrs. Erskine are all interesting in their own way.

The climax had a chilling effect on me. I wasn’t surprised because having read so much Christie and being an ardent admirer and follower of Miss Marple’s philosophy I’ve come to take nothing for granted and suspect everyone. But the scene was pretty suspenseful and scary and I did become anxious.

This is by far one of the best Miss Marple novels ever written. Even if you haven’t read any of the Miss Marple mysteries or even any of Agatha Christie’s books, you should read this book just to realize why Agatha Christie deserves her fame. Very, very highly recommended.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/58145715)

Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller premiered in 1949 at the Morosco Theatre, New York City. The original production was directed by Elia Kazan and ran for 742 performances. The play won the Pulitzer Prize for Drama and the Tony Award for Best Play in 1949.

Death of a Salesman is the story of unreal expectations and shattered dreams. Willy Loman, a salesman, approaching the dusk of his life, starts fearing that his whole life has been one big failure. He also secretly blames himself for the lackluster and unsuccessful lives of his two sons, Biff and Happy. With a blurring sense of reality he begins to slip between the past and the present, trying to figure out where it all went wrong.

I was and still am greatly impressed by how as the state of Willy’s mind deteriorates the line between the past and present fades away. Towards the end the past and present begin to coincide with one another.

Willy Loman, chasing the impossible and unattainable dream of greatness, remains convinced that greatness comes from personal appearance and popularity. To be well liked by everyone is all that matters.

Willy is so caught up with his own ideas of greatness and success that he fails to recognize himself (or his son) for who he truly is. The unrealistic goals he sets for himself and his sons, especially for Biff, ultimately blights everyone’s happiness and destroys their lives.

The way Willy leads Biff towards all the wrong things and all the wrong paths in life is really very alarming to observe.

Willy’s wife Linda is kind and affectionate but ultimately a weak person. At one point when Willy is having a conversation with his dead brother Ben about the possibility of going to Alaska with him it is indicated that Linda may have held him back from moving forward in his life. Their younger son, Happy, is very determined not to notice the terrible dreariness of his life and tries to drown its futility with a lot of bluster.

Willy’s older son Biff is constantly idealized by his father. Biff was a bright young athlete in high school and was well liked (popular). But since then he has done nothing and that crushed his father more than anything else. He keeps wondering why Biff ended up where he is today. On the other hand, Biff, who once admired his father for being a great man is now disillusioned by him. He is angered by his father’s constant misconceptions about him and tries to show him the reality of their lives but fails. It is interesting how each of them put the other up on a pedestal and how their mutual disillusionment contributes to the other’s failure.

Arthur Miller’s writing is simply great. Saying anything less than that would be an insult.

In the end, it is not just the death of Willy Loman’s dreams that makes me sad but the fact that it could all have been prevented. If only he had focused on what he had and not on what he wanted to have, his whole family could have been saved from their slow descent towards the abyss of discontent and misery.

Death of a Salesman is a beautifully heartbreaking work of art It is possibly the best play I’ve ever read. A true masterpiece!

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/50267683)

Porua, as an old theater major, I can't begin to tell you how much I'm enjoying your take on plays. I was in our college production of Death of Salesman many (many, many!) years back. At the end of the show, the audience was always deathly silent for several seconds. That play just has that effect on people.

#102 “Porua, as an old theater major, I can't begin to tell you how much I'm enjoying your take on plays.”

This is probably the best compliment I’ve received here on LT. So, thank you very, very much. Like I’ve said before not a lot of people seem to like reading plays. It feels great to meet a kindred spirit, theaelizabet!

You were on your college production of Death of Salesman? Which role did you play? Must have felt great to be a part of something like that! I totally get the audience’s reaction. Isn’t it strange that a play that is a little more than a 100 pages long can have that much impact upon almost everyone who comes in to contact with it, be it through reading and/or watching it being performed?

Of course, there are some people who don’t like it. In fact that is what triggered my re-read of Death of Salesman. I saw on another thread a couple of people calling it a mediocre work and not one of Arthur Miller’s best. I re-read it to refresh my memory. To see if it is all I thought it was. And I love it as much as I loved it back when I first read it.

"A murder is announced and will take place on Friday, October 29th, at Little Paddocks, at 6:30 p.m. Friends accept this, the only intimation."

It is this bizarre notice, published in the Chipping Cleghorn Gazette, that starts off one of the most intricate mysteries Agatha Christie has ever written called, A Murder Is Announced.

A Murder Is Announced was first published in the UK by the Collins Crime Club in 1950 and in the US by Dodd, Mead and Company in the same year.

Miss Blacklock’s home Little Paddocks becomes the centre of attention at the village of Chipping Cleghorn when it is announced that a murder will shortly be taking place there. Curious neighbours drop in one by one at the appointed time. Then unexpectedly the power goes out, leaving everyone in the dark...

A Murder Is Announced was the first Miss Marple book I ever read. In fact this is probably the first Agatha Christie book I ever read. This is what got me hooked to Agatha Christie and also to Miss Marple. Since then I have been a devoted fan of Agatha Christie and an ardent admirer of her creation, Miss Marple.

The setting of the story is vintage Christie. A comfortable, little village where everyone seemingly knows everyone and all is beautifully quite and picturesque.

In this book Christie successfully portrays the post Second World War era atmosphere of uncertainty. As Miss Marple explains in the book that before, everyone lived in the same place for years and if someone new came they brought letters of introduction from someone the locals knew. But after the war people got scattered. New, unknown faces began pouring in from all over the country. Now people had no choice but to take the others at face value. They could never be sure if people are really who they say they are. This post-war reality plays an important part in the narrative.

The daughter of one of Miss Marple’s friends, Diana ‘Bunch’ Harmon, makes an appearance in the story. She later reappears in a Miss Marple short story called, Sanctuary.

One thing that does bother me is the characterization of Mitzi. She is the housekeeper and cook of Little Paddocks. As she is a foreigner and a refugee, her character is given elaborate and strange mannerisms. I don’t feel comfortable with racial stereotypes. But I guess it was just a product of its time.

The tension in the narrative starts right from the beginning and the narrative never lets one relax.

Christie does give us a lot of clues to ponder about. But only by paying scrupulous attention to each and every word will anyone be able to spot those clues and grasp their significance.

A Murder Is Announced is definitely very engrossing. It comes as a very close second to Christie’s Sleeping Murder as the best Miss Marple mystery ever written. A true classic mystery novel. Highly recommended.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/58424521)

My monthly ticker update! As of the 31st of March I've read 20 books. So, 30 more to go!

Way to go! Once you reach your goal, do you think you'll change what kinds of books you read?

In the end, it is not just the death of Willy Loman’s dreams that makes me sad but the fact that it could all have been prevented. If only he had focused on what he had and not on what he wanted to have, his whole family could have been saved from their slow descent towards the abyss of discontent and misery. That's one of the major lessons in life, isn't it?

“Way to go! Once you reach your goal, do you think you'll change what kinds of books you read?”

Oh no, I’d never change the type of books I read. For me it is the journey that matters, not the destination. All I want is to have fun on the way. These books actually make me what I am. :-)

These books actually make me what I am. :-)

So true!

The Remains of the Day is the third published novel by the author Kazuo Ishiguro and continues to be one of his most appreciated works. It won the 1989 Booker Prize for best fiction and ranked among the Sunday Times list of 100 greatest novels.

The story is narrated in first person through the character of Mr. Stevens. Mr. Stevens worked as a butler at the Darlington Hall for Lord Darlington for nearly thirty years. As he is on his way to visit a former colleague, he reminisces about his own life and career.

To me the title The Remains of the Day signifies the twilight of the protagonist, Mr. Stevens’, life when he looks back and thinks about all that he has done throughout that life. The significance of the title becomes especially apparent towards the end of the book, when sitting on the pier at Weymouth in the evening Mr. Stevens suddenly comes to realize the truth about his own life and breaks down.

One topic that the character of Mr. Stevens keeps discussing over and over again is the idea of dignity. What is dignity? How can one uphold one’s own dignity? Is it a quality a man (especially a great butler) is born with or something he can learn throughout his life?

Another idea he maintains is that a great butler must never be himself. The only time he can be himself is when he is absolutely alone.

These are the ideas that define the character of Mr. Stevens. The idea of maintaining his dignity in every stressful situation and the idea never being himself. He is so good at the last one that he forgets to be himself even when he is alone.

By constantly maintaining his dignity and professional demeanor he sort of loses his humanity. He knows perfectly well what is going on, in his own life and all around Darlington house. He has feelings too. But he never admits to having any. Because he cannot betray his profession. He must uphold his dignity at any cost.

The only proof we ever get of his humanity is through the eyes of the others. Especially through the eyes of the young Mr. Cardinal on two separate life defining moments.

His social position and his absolute devotion to his profession ultimately thwart his emotional growth and make it impossible for him to live a normal life.

The character of Lord Darlington is central to the narrative. Stevens’ firm loyalty to him makes his descriptions of him hardly neutral. But as we get increasing glimpses of Lord Darlington’s life and work we begin to understand that his actions, even to someone as loyal as Mr. Stevens, may seem ‘misguided’ and wrong to say the least.

Mr. Stevens is at his most guarded while describing his relationship with the former housekeeper of the Darlington Hall, Miss Kenton. Indeed he hardly dares to describe her. But through it all we get to see what Miss Kenton’s and indeed Stevens’ own feelings were at the time.

One thing that I liked about the characters that Mr. Stevens comes across on his journey is that they are all nice and kind people. I enjoyed that because literature is so often filled with so many unpleasant people that meeting some kind people is actually kind of refreshing.

Ishiguro is a wonderful writer. It is hard to believe that Mr. Stevens is not a real person, that his feelings and experiences are not real and that it is Kazuo Ishiguro who is really speaking to us through him. The narrative is remarkably easy to read. The language is so simple and yet is never mediocre or vulgar.

Even though the novel ends on a note of hope I cannot help but feel a deep sense of melancholy. The thought that someone’s whole life may have been just an assortment of missed opportunities and misplaced loyalties is depressing.

For someone who seldom if ever really enjoys a book written during the last twenty or so years, I have enjoyed reading The Remains of the Day. It is well written and Kazuo Ishiguro is an exceptional writer. All the accolades it has received are well deserved. Definitely recommended.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/53518860)

Great review--thumbed you! I felt like I was sitting in on a good discussion in my book group! :-)

Thank you for giving a thumbs up to my review, bonnie! I appreciate it because you read far more modern fiction than I do and your appreciation means I’ve understood the book correctly! :-)

You always do such a great job of summing up a book, it makes me a tad jealous. If I could be so bold, here is one answer to your question 'What is Dignity?', from a master poet, conveniently set to music. (The link is to a youtube video, FYI)

I did not know about this author before joining LT. I have seen him mentioned on many different threads and have been wondering if I would like his work. I like the way you explained how you feel about this book and I like the book cover! I will be looking for this book. Thanks for sharing!

Another excellent review, Porua. I must get busy and read the dignified Mr. Stevens' story.

Great review Porua, and congratulations on it being Hot! I read and LOVED this book back in... 2008, I see from my profile. It was one of many great discoveries I owe to LT - someone recommended it as being similar to Jane Austen. The similarities are tenuous, but I can see what they mean - characters drawn with an unerring hand, who are so much themselves that they couldn't possibly be anyone else. But Austen pokes gentle fun at her characters, while Ishiguro makes us too sorry for them to laugh at them.

# 112 “You always do such a great job of summing up a book, it makes me a tad jealous.”

Really? I think I’m so bad at summing up things that my reviews always get a bit long winded. And thanks for the link, DP. The lyrics are truly thought provoking.

# 113 “I like the way you explained how you feel about this book...”

That’s what I always try to do. I can’t really explain any of the philosophical, deeply embedded thoughts or any political ideas that are present in books. I’m not smart enough for that. All I can do is explain how the book made me feel and what I got from the book.

I hope you enjoy the book when you eventually do read it.

# 114 You mean you haven’t read The Remains of the Day yet? Your amazing reading lists and reviews made me believe you have read most of the important works in modern fiction! But seriously do read it. I think this is a book you’ll enjoy.

# 115 Yeah it’s hot. But not as hot as your The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle review. Way to go, Muse!

“...characters drawn with an unerring hand, who are so much themselves that they couldn't possibly be anyone else.”

Oh so true!

Porua, I have missed so many important books that I want to read. I'm reading as fast as I can!

I didn't realize there were degrees of hotness. I thought that when you're hot, you're hot!

# 117 Oh yeah there are degrees of hotness! Muse has the # 1 Hot Review right now. While I have the # 2. ;-)

There's nothing wrong with being long winded. It tends to go hand in hand with being thorough and well thought out. I encourage it over on my 50BC. I've been too busy with a study of ancient Greece to get to any Thomas Hardy or even Don Quixote, which has been on my bookstand since last summer now.

I'm glad you enjoyed the Dylan song. His lyrics are always thought provoking, even if his voice is like the Swedish Chef from the Muppets with a nasty cold sometimes. Depends on the era, he has put out who knows how many albums since 1962 or whenever it was. He still puts on a great concert too. A personal favorite lyric of mine is...

Build me a cabin in Utah,
Marry me a wife, catch rainbow trout.
Have a bunch of kids who call me Pa,
That must be what it's all about...

# 119 Haven’t read Don Quixote. I wonder if I’ll like it. I’ll be interested to hear about what you think of the book when you eventually do get to it.

“...even if his voice is like the Swedish Chef from the Muppets with a nasty cold sometimes.”

LOL!

Nice lyrics, BTW.

Hi Porua-- I just finished watching the movie 84 Charing Cross Road. On the dvd was the trailer for The Remains of The Day. I'm putting the book and the movie on my list of things to pick up tomorrow.

# 121 Hello, tjblue! I saw only parts of the movie The Remains of The Day but while reading the book I kept picturing Anthony Hopkins as Mr. Stevens. This was a little disconcerting as I don’t like to picture actors while I read books. I wonder if that happens to others (the whole picturing thing I mean).

84 Charing Cross Road is a book that I’ve been meaning to read. I’ve heard wonderful things about it. Have you read it, tjblue?

Hope you enjoy The Remains of The Day as much as I did!

The Queen of Hearts is a collection of ten short stories set within a connecting narrative. It was published in 1859. I had read one of the short stories in an anthology for detective fiction and had been looking to read the story in its original context ever since. But The Queen of Hearts is not a detective story collection. The stories are a mixture of adventure, romance, suspense, mystery, etc, etc.

‘The Queen of Hearts’ is the nickname of Jessie Yelverton. Jessie’s father had arranged in his will that she should spend at least six weeks with her elderly guardian, Mr. Griffith. Mr. Griffith lives with his two brothers, Mr. Owen and Mr. Morgan in an isolated house called The Glen Tower in South Wales. The three elderly gentlemen set out to delay her departure for ten days so that she may still be there when Mr. Griffith’s son, George comes home from the war. What follows is a sort of Arabian Nights or Decameron nights type of story telling, where the three brothers tell a different ‘true’ story each evening.

The first day Brother Owen, who was a clergyman in his youth, tells the story of The Siege Of The Black Cottage. This is an early example of a brave and quick-witted female character by Collins. This is also a real short story because it is really short but packs the right amount of excitement. A great little adventure story.

The second day Brother Griffith, who was a lawyer, tells the story of The Family Secret. This is a sad and heart warming tale of a young man who seeks the truth about a family tragedy that no one wants to talk about. This story is a little longer than a short story but it is still a good one.

The third day Brother Morgan, who was a doctor, tells the tale of The Dream-Woman. Any reader of suspense/ fantasy/ horror genre would be able to guess what the story is about fairly early on. But that doesn’t mean the thrills aren’t there. I felt a chill down my spine as Isaac Scatchard, the protagonist, wakes up suddenly in the middle of the night at a lonely inn, paralyzed with fear!

The fourth day is for Brother Griffith’s story of the Mad Monkton. It is a distinctively Gothic story in every way. This story is long drawn out and loses its edge because of it. But the narrative is still engaging enough.

The fifth day Brother Morgan tells of The Dead Hand. This is a sappy little piece about the curses of illegitimacy. Quite dull and boringly long. Curiously, one of the main characters in the story bears a striking resemblance to the character of Ezra Jennings from Collins’ The Moonstone.

The sixth day’s story is Brother Griffith’s The Biter Bit. This story was originally published as 'Who is the Thief?'. This is the story that I had originally read that led me to this book. The Biter Bit is very possibly the funniest detective story ever written. It is told in the form of letters and is hilarious to say the least. Even if one is not interested in the detective genre I request everyone to please read this little gem of a story because it is just that GOOD!

The seventh day is for Brother Owen's story of a puritanical parson in The Parson's Scruple. It’s a good story but once again feels a little drawn out.

The eighth day brings us to Brother Griffith's story of A Plot In Private Life. This, along with Mad Monkton, are two of the longest stories in the collection. The narrator of the story is William, the faithful servant of Mrs. Norcross. When the widow marries for a second time misfortune befalls her as her new mercenary husband torments her. Mrs. Norcross is once again a strong woman caught up in an unfortunate situation like so many of the other Collins heroines. A detective lawyer's clerk, Mr. Dark comes to the rescue. Mr. Dark is a most unlikely looking detective with a round face and jolly manners but he is more competent and sharper than he looks. William's relationship with Mr. Dark foreshadows the relationship between Betteredge and Sergeant Cuff in The Moonstone. The story is good but is way too long and my interest started to wane after a while. It also makes rather racist remarks about a person of mixed origins.

The ninth day’s story is Brother Morgan's Fauntleroy. This is a piece of historical fiction about the life of Henry Fauntleroy, the last man hanged in England for forgery. This is a really short story and is pretty good.

The tenth and last day, Brother Owen tells the story of Anne Rodway. It is told in the form of a diary of a young working woman Anne Rodway who looks for clues to the death of her best friend Mary, after the latter dies under mysterious circumstances. The story shows the poor working conditions and the bleak, harrowing lives of poor lonely women in Victorian London. This story features possibly the first fictional female detective. Anne Rodway, a resourceful and independent young woman, is another example of Collins’ strong heroines. This is a good and engaging story.

All of the short stories are fairly good. But about the connecting narrative I’m not so sure. Sometimes it made me lose patience and sometimes it made me smile. I really don’t like romance so the romantic nature of the motive behind the story telling may have something to do with it. Jessie Yelverton the so called ‘Queen of Hearts’ of the story is o.k. She’s nothing great. Mr. Griffith annoyed me.

One thing I really liked about the book is the fact that most of the stories portrayed the female characters as complete human beings with both good and bad sides to them.

This book is an example of what Wilkie Collins can do with any given genre. His writing is very good and entertaining in this book.

Even though I myself didn’t like the connecting narrative, everyone else might because I presume people like romance more than I do. I also know that not everyone shares my enthusiasm for short stories. But The Queen of Hearts is such a good piece of literature that I feel bound to recommend it wholeheartedly. Rarely do I find a book were almost all of the stories are good. So, from me definitely highly recommended.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/56390989)

I almost always try to read a book before I watch the movie just because I like books more than movies, but it doesn't bother me to visualize an actor while I read the book. Now I always see Denzel Washington and Angelina Jolie when I read Lincoln Rhyme novels and I always see Mel Gibson as William Wallace or Jack Nicholson in The Shining or Tom Selleck as Jesse Stone.
I did read 84 Charing Cross Road before watching the movie. The book and the movie were quite similar.

Try Tom Selleck as General Eisenhower!

#124 “I almost always try to read a book before I watch the movie just because I like books more than movies,...”

Me too. As it is I’m really not fond of literary adaptations. Most of the time they change the plots and basically butcher the story. Look at how they are murdering my favorite Agatha Christie’s Miss Marple.

Only once in my life have I read a book after I’ve seen the movie and that was A Passage to India. But surprisingly I didn’t picture the actors as the characters (in my head) at all!

#125 “Try Tom Selleck as General Eisenhower!”

Eeeks! When did that happen?

It was a mid 2000's USA/A&E movie

Actually, it was surprisingly good, as a WWII history buff. The weird thing was that it wasn't that Eisenhower looked like Tom Selleck, but that he sounded like Magnum PI. That was the only downfall to an otherwise great movie. And I rarely like movies, ever.

# 127 “...it wasn't that Eisenhower looked like Tom Selleck, but that he sounded like Magnum PI.”

Every time I hear Tom Selleck’s voice I think of his character Richard from Friends. I used to watch it as a kid and never quite understood why Monica liked him so much. As for Magnum P.I. never watched it myself but heard my parents talk about it when they saw him in Friends.

I watched Magnum PI when I was a kid and I wanted a red lamborghini really, really bad.

Not to burst any bubbles but Magnum drove a Ferrari.

I knew it was one or the other and that someone would correct me, but it was red, right. Cause I really, really wanted the red car. Now I'm to safe and practical to think about owning a red car!

The Moonstone is a novel published in 1868. Written by Wilkie Collins it is considered to be the first detective novel in English. It was serialized in Charles Dickens’ magazine All the Year Round.

The Moonstone is the name of a large diamond which once belonged to a Hindu temple. Rachel Verinder, an heiress, receives it as a birthday gift. The stone goes missing that very night. The hunt for the diamond thief and to find the whereabouts of the diamond forms the core of the story. In this book Collins used the multi narration style for the second time after The Woman in White.

It is very obvious that the story was published in installments. To keep up the suspense the story is provided with too many characters with different voices crowding over each other and too many red herrings to baffle the readers.

Wilkie Collins certainly knew how to get the audience hooked. His narrative is gripping from the start and he never lets up. Even at nearly 500 pages long the book holds interest.

But he seemed to be in two minds about how to portray certain characters. On one hand he is very keen on providing social commentary on various subjects (the rights of women, the class system, the racial issues etc, etc,). But on the other hand, he was writing for a mid-Victorian audience. So, he puts in a good amount of Victorian melodrama into the narrative.

For instance, the character of Rachel Verinder is not your typical Victorian heroine as Mr. Bruff, the lawyer, says,

“The first instinct of girls in general, in being told anything which interests them, is to ask a multitude of questions, and then to run off, and talk it all over with some favorite friend. Rachel Verinder’s first instinct, under similar circumstances, was to shut herself up in her own mind, and to think it over by herself...”.

This makes her seem like a modern heroine. But when she meets Franklin Blake, her estranged lover, face to face for the first time after a year she promptly goes into hysterics and wrings her hands and cries out with fury and rage any time she receives a little provocation. The only consolation is, she doesn’t faint.

Comparisons between Charles dickens and Wilkie Collins are inevitable. They were contemporaries and very close friends. I feel that Collins was less sure about what he wanted to do. He seems kind of preachy to me. Sometimes his social commentary overshadows his narrative and sometimes the light, entertaining side of his writing comes out. It’s like a play of shadows and lights. Dickens seemed surer about how he wanted to deal with the issues important to him (child labour, the condition of prisons, the judiciary system etc, etc,) and how and when to entertain. With Dickens the characters are such a big part of the plots that long after the book is over one remembers their personalities. With Collins the characters are memorable but seem kind of undermined by the central themes that he wanted to enlarge upon. To me at least, Dickens is superior of the two in those aspects.

Among all the characters I liked Lady Verinder the best. She has a certain dignity and integrity about her that is hard to find in many female characters of that time. I found Ezra Jennings interesting. Collins’ understanding of his plight and his mixed race origins is moving. I wish we got to know more about him.

I don’t like the character of Gabriel Betteredge. He is an opinionated old man, definitely not as lovable as we’re led to believe. It is typical of him to say things like,

“I was something dissatisfied with my daughter- not for letting Mr. Franklin kiss her; Mr. Franklin was welcome to that...” when Mr. Franklin kisses his teenage daughter Penelope Betteredge. Another thing is, Collins says Gabriel is a man who is between 70 to 80 years old and yet he acts like a much younger man (for instance, when he collars Sergeant Cuff).

Sergeant Cuff has been portrayed as an archetype of the modern detective but he isn’t even present for most of the book. He is kept in the shadows while very mediocre characters occupy the narration and do the entire detective work instead of him. I would have liked to have seen more of him and his detection skills.

Rachel Verinder is a nothing more than a spoilt heiress. She is intelligent but refuses to see reason or take any advice from anyone. She behaves irrationally and unpredictably for most of the story. Franklin Blake, her (equally rich) persistent lover, is so many things at so many different times that he fails to take any distinguishable shape at all. The same goes for Godfrey Ablewhite. He’s bland and not properly fleshed out.

Rosanna Spearman’s character has more depth than many of the other characters. Her love is treated like dirt by the object of her affection who is only mildly surprised by it. The only one really sympathetic to her is surprisingly Sergeant Cuff, who says,

“Hadn’t you better say she’s mad enough to be an ugly girl and only a servant?’ he asked. ‘The falling in love with a gentleman of Mr. _______’s manners and appearance doesn’t seem to me to be the maddest part of her conduct by any means...You think Mr. _______ hasn’t got a suspicion of the girl’s fancy for him? Ah! he would have found it out fast enough if she had been nice looking...”

For me, the narrations of Gabriel Betteredge and Miss Clack dragged on a bit. Miss Clack is supposed to be funny and ridiculous but she is so negatively portrayed that I felt like I was being forced to hate her. Well, she is right on one account. Her estimation about the character of the elder Mr. Ablewhite turns out to be quite true.

I don’t like romance of any kind. And this book contains some very mushy romantic blabberings of Victorian love and unrequited yearnings. In fact it even overshadows the mystery for most of the time. I love mystery and didn’t like that at all but it will probably not bother any one else.

Even though Collins is sympathetic towards the Indians they are portrayed as some kind of strange, vicious, magic loving people. But this is a Victorian novel so it is just a product of the time.

The Moonstone is a really good page turner, highly entertaining. But to any modern reader of mystery it would seem obvious who the criminal is. It should be read for what it is, a big piece of the history of mystery/detective stories. No more, no less.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/58532969)

Wow, Porua, you got more out of it than I did. I just read it as a straight melodrama, and enjoyed it as such. Great review!

I don’t think I made one thing clear in my review that my comments regarding Collins’ writing is more of an overall observation of his writing in general, not just in The Moonstone. I feel when Collins isn’t trying so hard to make a point about social issues and just focused on entertaining his readers he’s a much better writer. Case in point, his The Queen of Hearts. Whereas with Dickens, all his social commentary doesn’t dim the entertainment value of his writing.

# 133 Hi, Muse! You see, I got so much out of this book because this is a re-read. My reviews reflect how a book makes me feel. The first time I read it six years ago I felt something was off. But I couldn’t point out what it was as clearly as I could now. I know most people love The Moonstone and was afraid that they would come after me with pitchforks for not loving it! I do like the book; I'm just not crazy about it.

Hi Porua,

I'm not coming after you with a pitchfork (I promise), but I wonder why I'm liking The Moonstone so much. Maybe because I'm reading it for the first time? I'm only about halfway through it and am tiring of Clack's piousness, but I loved the narration of Mr. Betteredge.

Oh well...different strokes and all. I do want to say that I admire you so much as a reader and reviewer. You know what you like and state it clearly in your reviews. Good for you! I tend to take the middle-of-the-road approach on many of my reviews because I either know I missed something in the reading or I don't want to step on any toes. That's just the "Betteredge" in me. I actually liked it when he said, "There is a great deal to be said on both sides."

# 135 Hi Donna! Most people do love The Moonstone so your loving it is only natural. I found Miss Clack kind of funny. The story does kind of drag when she narrates it and she narrates a huge chunk of it. Her ‘fake’ self-righteousness really does get on one’s nerves. But still her hypocrisy was so irritatingly funny!

Thank you for saying you admire me as a reader and reviewer. I do know what I like and I say it clearly and honestly. Most of the time my opinion about a book is not similar to the popular opinion. I always seem to swim against the tide! The same applies for the books and the genres I love to read. But I’ve always been (or I should say tried to be) honest about things. So, I simply state how the book made me feel and hope I don’t make everyone mad. I’m glad that hasn’t alienated everyone around here.

This place would be incredibly boring if everyone agreed with everyone else's opinions. A nice thing about LT though, is that people can disagree on an intelllectual level and still respect each other. I understand that's pretty rare on the web.

For me, Miss Clack was one of those characters you love to hate. I also have a great kindness for Mr Betteredge, though I think it's mainly his Robinson Crusoe thing that I find annoyingly endearing.

I've just realise that I like The Moonstone for its paradoxes :)

Well, I did say some nice things about The Moonstone. The narrative is gripping. It holds the reader’s interest even at nearly 500 odd pages. I liked the strong character of Lady Verinder and the complexity of Ezra Jennings. I liked Sergeant Cuff and wish there was more of him. Overall, The Moonstone is entertaining and a page turner. So, it’s not all bad. But most of the other characters are bland and underdeveloped. And I don’t like Betteredge.

# 137 Yeah, LT is one of the more tolerant websites out here. That is what I like about LT.

I have re-read two more Miss Marple mysteries by Agatha Christie.

First up is, They Do It With Mirrors, known as Murder with Mirrors in the US. A unique little Miss Marple mystery with an unusual setting.

The second one is, A Pocketful of Rye. A very entertaining and very engaging Miss Marple novel.

Porua, you've gotten me addicted to Agatha Christie.

How is They Do It With Mirrors? I have to interlibrary loan request it because my library has omitted it from their shelves.

# 140 Glad to be able to spread a little more of Christie mystery madness among my fellow LT members, eldashwood! ;-)

Regarding They Do It With Mirrors, I’ve said everything I had to about it on my review. The story is set at a reform home for juvenile criminals. That’s quite an unusual setting for a Miss Marple story. The way the idea of illusion is used in the story was really interesting. However, the characters are the weak point of this story. None of them are properly fleshed out. But overall it is a pretty enjoyable Miss Marple novel and I recommend it.

Hi Porua! Thanks for leaving me a comment letting me know you'd reviewed Nightmare Abbey. My procrastinating-online time has sort of gotten away from me lately (and by 'sort of' I mean 'entirely'), and I have really fallen off on reading/posting on LibraryThing threads, so I probably wouldn't have known without the comment. Nightmare Abbey does sound very funny, and I appreciate your review. I'll have to keep it in mind.

# 142 Hello, legxleg! Yes, as both of us have read Northanger Abbey, I thought you'd enjoy hearing my thoughts about Nightmare Abbey, another satire on Gothic literature. It is a pretty funny book. Glad you appreciate my review! Hope to see you around more often. :-)

A Kiss for Cinderella is a three act play by J.M. Barrie. J.M. Barrie, who is famous for being the creator of Peter Pan, also wrote a string of popular plays during the late 19th and early 20th century. A Kiss for Cinderella opened on Broadway in the December of 1916.

A Kiss for Cinderella is a fantasy/romance set in London. The time is during WWI. Food and genuine human affection are scarce. In this bleak time, a girl named ‘Miss Thing’ works as a domestic help. Hungry and alone most of her life, it is her imagination that helps lessen the pain. She believes that she is the fabled ‘Cinderella’ and waits patiently for her invitation to the Royal ball.

The play’s first two acts are sparklingly fresh. The first act introduces Miss Thing or Cinderella, her master Mr. Bodie, the artist and David, the policeman. The policeman wants to find out why Cinderella has been lifting wooden boards from her employer and what she has been doing with them.

The first act contains some witty exchanges between Mr. Bodie and the policeman. It is evident that Mr. Bodie has a great sense of affection for Cinderella. Also, the policeman is portrayed as a thoroughly unimaginative and unromantic man, a paradox to Cinderella’s imaginative and romantic nature.

The second act begins at Cinderella’s home. It is revealed that she is a jack of all trades of her poor neighbourhood. She works as a tailor, a doctor, a barber, etc, etc. all for a penny. The policeman follows her home and discovers the reason she needs the wooden boxes. It is to accommodate a group of war orphans she has been secretly taking care of. After a pretty festive supper with the policeman and the children, Cinderella goes outside to wait for her fairy godmother.

In the second part of the second act we witness Cinderella’s spectacular ball. It is complete with food and ice cream and golden furniture and above all a prince. A prince who surprisingly looks a little like our policeman.

In the second act the policeman is slowly drawn in to Cinderella’s world. His transformation is remarkable. Also, Cinderella becomes more and more unbalanced as the act progresses.

The third act is set in Dr. Bodie’s country practice. Dr. Bodie is the sister of Mr. Bodie. Here we find out that Cinderella, whose real name is Jane, was brought to the hospital by the policeman after nearly freezing to death. Dr. Bodie makes a gloomy prediction about Cinderella’s fate but she does get her happy ending in the end.

The third act is, unfortunately, not as good as the first two. The introduction of the unnecessary characters of Danny, the wounded soldier and Charlotte, the probationer really dampens the mood of the story. Fortunately, these diversions don’t last for long.

Among the characters the children under Cinderella’s care are absolutely fresh and funny. They make their presence felt in just one act. The central figures of Cinderella and the policeman are good. The policeman’s increasing tenderness towards Cinderella is so moving. His eagerness to make her happy and comfortable really touched my heart. Mr. Bodie is an affectionate, if slightly narrow-minded, man. Dr. Bodie, I really admired. Such a strong female character is very good to see.

I really loved how Barrie portrayed Cinderella’s dream ball sequence. As an extremely poor girl, she has obviously never been to a real ball. Her perceptions are so well imbued in to her dream that not for one moment did I forget that this is Cinderella’s dream. The product of a poor girl’s imagination. Her dream is filled with the things she knows, things that are familiar to her. Only they are tinged highly with an unreality that comes with dreams. For example, she has never seen real royalty. So, the king and the queen in her dream looks like the king and queen from playing cards. Even her fairy godmother is seen wearing a Red Cross Nurse's uniform, the only caring and kind elderly women she knows.

One thing that really bothered me was the way Dr. Bodie was derided for being a female doctor. It is implied that being a doctor is non-feminine. She needs to be reminded that she is, after all, a mere woman. I know it is a product of its time. But still the derogatory tone used to describe her really irritated me!

It was a little difficult to read the play because every little detail of how the play should be staged is discussed at length. Also, the way some of the minor characters may end up or how their lives are like outside of the time line of the play is really unnecessary.

What I really love about this play is that even though it is essentially a romantic fantasy, it never leaves reality. Especially, the scenes where Cinderella and the policeman converse. The policeman is so sincere in his love but is hopelessly tongue tied and inarticulate. That is what real life is like. People don’t have ready made dialogues for expressing their feelings.

The play is incredibly short. An hour is more than enough to finish it.

A Kiss for Cinderella certainly has its flaws. But the way Barrie provides the reader’s with a happy ending while retaining its closeness to reality is remarkable. I admire this play for that.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/59081449)

Since you've had a lot of discussion about The Moonstone I thought this would be a good place to give a little warning. In reading To Say Nothing of the Dog by Connie Willis - a book I thoroughly enjoyed in every other respect - I discovered that she gave away the resolution to The Moonstone. It was on my tbr list (I loved The Woman in White) and inexplicably Willis spoiled it!

So if you have both books on your list, please, please read The Moonstone first!

I like the sound of A Kiss for CInderella, thanks for the review!

# 145 Hello, NarratorLady! Thank you for your warning about To Say Nothing of the Dog. Have you read The Moonstone regardless of its spoiled ending or have you decided to skip it altogether?

# 146 Hi, Muse! You’re welcome! A Kiss for Cinderella is quite a nice romantic fantasy. As someone who steers clear of romance it was kind of surprising that I liked it.

Do you know I got to know of this play from an Agatha Christie short story? Christie has introduced me to some wonderful literature! Like Tennyson’s poetry and Barrie’s plays or that great Victorian reference book, Enquire Within Upon Everything. BTW, I’ve been reading bits of Enquire Within Upon Everything just for fun and getting some very interesting (and funny) insights in to the Victorian life.

4.50 from Paddington is a detective novel written by Agatha Christie. It was first published in the UK by the Collins Crime Club in 1957 and in the US by Dodd, Mead and Company in the same year under the title of What Mrs. McGillicuddy Saw! A paperback edition by Pocket Books in 1963 changed the title to Murder, She Said to tie in with the feature film release of the same name.

Elspeth McGillicuddy, on her way to visit her old friend Miss Marple, has been having a rather uneventful journey. But that changes when she looks out the window of her train carriage and sees a woman being strangled in a passing train. The problem is no one believes her. Only Miss Marple does. But if there has been a murder where is the body? It’s up to Miss Marple to find that out.

The unusual way in which Mrs. McGillicuddy witnesses the crime has long been one of my favorites in detective fiction. I’m yet to discover a better way in which the commencement a crime is seen through the eyes of the witness.

One of the main characters of this mystery (and Miss Marple’s right hand woman) is Lucy Eyelesbarrow. She is a professional housekeeper is a very unusual woman. She is efficient and organized. The way she handles the investigation and all the household duties at the same time dealing with her own inner emotional confusion, is remarkable. She is definitely not a damsel in distress.

In fact, all of the female characters in this story are unusually strong. For example, another female character, Emma Crackenthorpe, is not a push over and holds her own pretty well against a pack of scowling brothers and a cantankerous father.

Detective-Inspector Dermot Craddock reappears in this book after A Murder Is Announced. He is the godson of Sir Henry Clithering, who is an old friend of Miss Marple. In fact, the case from A Murder Is Announced is discussed at least on two separate occasions in this book.

Also, reappearing is the Vicar and his family from The Murder at the Vicarage and The Body in the Library. I love how all of these familiar character grow old as time goes by in Miss Marple’s universe, makes the reader feel like as if s/he has known them all their lives.

Among the other characters Luther Crackenthorpe, the Crackenthorpe family patriarch is a nasty old man who relishes the thought of out living all of his children. He is one strange man. All of Luther’s sons, Cedric, Harold and Alfred, are greedy, unpleasant and definitely unlikable. Christie is much more sympathetic in her portrayal of Luther’s only surviving daughter, Emma Crackenthorpe.

Luther’s son-in-law, his deceased daughter Edith’s husband, Brian Eastley, is like so many of other Christie creations. Christie definitely had a theory about war time heroes not being fit for day to day life. Peace time doesn’t suit them. They find real life too tame and become restless. This theme reoccurs in many of her stories. For example, Pat Fortescue’s first husband in A Pocketful of Rye.

The relationship between Brian Eastley and his son Alexander was really touching and the interaction between Alexander and Lucy was fun to read. The characters of Alexander Eastley and his friend James Stoddard-West definitely brighten up the narrative.

Miss Marple and her unlimited stock of ‛village parallels’ are as fresh as ever. One might say that Miss Marple does not do all the sleuthing herself and it’s not fair but the story is so nicely paced that I hardly felt her absence at all. She is, as she herself says in the book, old and physically weak. It is impossible for her to do what Lucy Eyelesbarrow does.

I always talk about Agatha Christie’s little insights about psychology of murderers. Here is an interesting one,

“Yes, of course ______ was a little peculiar, as they say, but I never see myself that that's any real excuse. I mean you can be a little peculiar in so many different ways. Sometimes you just go about giving all your possessions away and writing cheques on bank accounts that don't exist, just so as to benefit people. It shows, you see, that behind being peculiar you have quite a nice disposition. But of course if you're peculiar and behind it you have a bad disposition...”

I was surprised by the identity of the killer. I really didn’t think (after having read way too many Christie mysteries) that the person was the murdering type at all.

One little thing I’ve always wanted to know is ‘Who does Lucy Eyelesbarrow end up with?’ Miss Marple says she knows but we the poor readers are left very much in the dark. I’m still wondering.

The central mystery of 4.50 from Paddington is rather a common one. But I enjoyed it nonetheless. Because I don’t expect uncommon stories from Christie. What I expect is a feeling of satisfaction, the comfort of having read a good cozy mystery. I always come back to Christie for comfort and am never disappointed.

Finished reading the play Every Man in His Humor by Ben Johnson last night. It would be presumptuous of me to think that I am capable of reviewing a work by Ben Johnson. I enjoyed it but not too much. That's all I'm going to say about that.

If on a Winter's Night a Traveler (or Se una notte d'inverno un viaggiatore in Italian) is a novel written by Italo Calvino. It was published in 1979. The translation I read was by William Weaver (1981).

I picked up this book because the premise seemed quite out of the ordinary. Besides I was curious to see why this is a favorite of so many of my friends.

This is the story of a reader trying to read a book called If on a Winter's Night a Traveler. After finishing the first chapter he (the reader) discovers that the same chapter is repeated throughout the rest of the book. He goes to return the book and is given a replacement. But this book turns out to be a different one altogether. Just as the reader begins to enjoy his new book, that one is cut off after the first chapter too.

This pattern continues throughout the story. The reader reads the first chapter of one book, it gets cut off after that, he goes out to find that book and ends up getting a completely different book that also gets cut off after the first chapter.

Along the way the reader meets another reader, an attractive female one, called Ludmilla. She appears to be having the same difficulty as the reader and now the reader has two problems: one is the problem of the incomplete books and the second is that of attracting the attention of Ludmilla.

The book grows more and more fantastic with the reader uncovering an international conspiracy. There are other characters such as a mysterious and devious man called Ermes Marana, a frustrated writer called Silas Flannery, Ludmilla’s sister, Lotaria, etc.

All of the male characters in the book seem to be trying to get Ludmilla’s attention one way or another. This pattern is also recreated in all of the unfinished books.

In If on a Winter's Night a Traveler the reader, is directly addressed as ‘You’. I, the real reader, in that case become the protagonist of the story. This doesn’t really work well because the ‘You’ in the book is a man. So, unless the real reader is an actual man in the real world some readers may find this jarring. I know that is really not the point of the book but it may be rather problematic.

This book discusses some fundamental ideas about the process of writing and reading. I like the way the book shows how reading may mean different things to different people.

All of the chapters are supposed to be broken off at a moment of great tension but the problem is I did not feel any tension at any of the cut off points. None of the stories seemed that exciting to me. All of the first chapters are o.k. but once any of them ended I moved on to the next one, not caring.

Italo Calvino is indeed a very clever writer. He creates an intriguing tale around an interesting premise.

This wasn’t a difficult read for me. I was fairly entertained and the book did provide me with some food for thought. I just wish the unfinished chapters were as engaging as they are purported to be. Because otherwise the whole idea of searching for the truth behind the unfinished books begins to feel a little shaky.

If on a Winter's Night a Traveler, is definitely a unique, original take on the whole experience of reading and writing. Overall, an interesting experience.

Porua, I don't know how you do it! I haven't done much reading at all lately, but you just keep pumping out the reviews! I've just been so busy. But next week we are on vacation and I'm filling up a box of books to bring along. Hopefully I'll have time to read some of them :)

# 151 I’m having a bout of speed reading, Amy. I’m enjoying it while I can by trying to reduce my TBR pile before I hit one of my reading slumps.

Hope you enjoy your vacation!

Greenshaw's Folly is a Miss Marple short story. I place it in my story wise re-reading of the Miss Marple books after 4.50 from Paddington (1957) and before The Mirror Crack'd from Side to Side (1962). It is (for some unknown reason) traditionally included in the Hercule Poirot collection The Adventure of the Christmas Pudding (1960). It was published in the US as a part of the short story collection Double Sin and Other Stories (1961). This collection was not published in the UK.

Interestingly I got to know of a play I read last month, A Kiss for Cinderella, from Greenshaw's Folly. In fact one of the main plot twists in this story happens with the aid of this play.

Greenshaw's Folly is one of the cleverest of the Miss Marple short stories. The setting of the story, an old house called Greenshaw's Folly, always gives me the creeps. It is not that the house itself is menacing but its atmosphere certainly is. There is something so not natural about the inhabitants of the house. The sharp but slightly unhinged mistress of the house Miss Greenshaw, the sullen young gardener Alfred and Miss Cresswell, the unnaturally refined housekeeper.

Miss Marple is as sharp as ever. She solves this mystery by just listening to the different accounts given to her by her nephew Raymond West and the young Louise Oxley. She does most of it so logically. Miss Marple made me chuckle with,

“It really seems all wrong- morally, I mean, that ______’s laziness should have saved his life.” This is what makes her so remarkable, her upright moral character. She never tolerates any kind of wickedness or vice but nevertheless accepts people kindly for whatever they might be.

And then there is the way the murder is committed! I have never ever read anything so bizarre in a Marple story. Also the alibi is so cleverly established.

Greenshaw's Folly is definitely one of my favorite mystery short stories ever!

I actually enjoyed reading a Christie mystery with the solution spoiled (Towards Zero). Once. It's not the worst thing in the world, but it just seems wrong and a disservice to the author, although it does let the reader make a study of the author's methods of hiding clues. I would have liked Murder on the Orient Express more had I known the solution to that classic, but my assumption about the crime turned out to be correct. I have noticed in the several Christie mysteries I've read that the murderer is the person you least expect and has been built up as being clearly innocent.

# 154 Last year I read two Christie mysteries with spoiled endings, The Murder on the Orient Express and The Murder of Roger Ackroyd. I had avoided reading The Murder on the Orient Express for years. But when I finally did I found that it didn't bother me at all. What mattered was the way Poirot solves the case with his 'little grey cells'.

And as for The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, well, what Christie buff doesn't know the solution to that one? I've always been extremely curious to know how Christie managed to pull it off and last year I finally found out.

So, I guess knowing the solution didn't bother me as much as I thought it would.

I read The Murder of Roger Ackroyd a couple years ago and didn't know anything about it except what an incautious glance at the back cover told me: that it was something of a landmark in detective fiction with an extra specially surprising ending. I enjoyed it, but I think it was a little overhyped. That's the trouble with back-cover blurbs, isn't it? They give the book so much to live up to.

Yes - I oversold that one to my sister, who was then completely underwhelmed when she read it. I kicked myself - if I hadn't beaten her over the head with how amazing the ending was, she probably would have loved it.

I enjoyed The Murder of Roger Ackroyd. It is a little over the top and it does require a leap of faith but none of it mattered to me. Knowing the ending probably helped me to deal with any doubt I might have felt about the plausibility of the book.

Finished reading Miss Pym Disposes yesterday. I’ll not be reviewing it. I’d rather move on to my next read.

Did you dislike Miss Pym Disposes, Porua? Not that you HAVE to review it or anything, of course. I'm just curious :)

# 159 Miss Pym Disposes just didn’t grab me. My attention kept wandering away from the narrative. I felt reluctant every time I had to pick it up. Like I’ve said before I can only say what I’ve felt about a book. I just didn’t feel anything. Consequently no review.

Aww, that's too bad. I really enjoyed that book and found the characters fascinating. But you're reading another Tey, aren't you? I seem to remember you mentioning that in some thread or another. If you are, I hope you enjoy it more than you did this one! One thing I'm coming to appreciate about Tey is her subtle, quiet talent for deft writing. It doesn't shout in your face, but everything is well executed, so well that you don't notice it until you come up for air.

Finished reading To Love and Be Wise By Josephine Tey. And I did enjoy this one more, Amy. Definitely better than her Miss Pym Disposes. But overall, I find Tey’s writing uncomfortable to read and dated. Unlike Agatha Christie’s books Tey’s haven’t aged that well. Her plots seem rather contrived. For example, the whole thing about a certain person’s true identity in To Love and Be Wise. Highly melodramatic and unreal. It all feels kind of forced. I liked the character of Detective-Inspector Alan Grant though.

I haven't read To Love and Be Wise, so I can't speak to that one. There is a bit of convenient contrivance in Brat Farrar, but I was still able to enjoy the story. I have to admit, I don't see how Tey's writing and plots have aged any more poorly than Christie's. As for being melodramatic, unreal, and forced, Christie has some of her murderers wear prosthetics to trick us, for goodness' sake! :P (In What Mrs. McGillicuddy Saw.) That was also her solution for the mystery that was co-written by the Detection Club, The Floating Admiral.

Alan Grant's not bad. He's not a poorly written character by any means, but he is naturally compared to Dorothy Sayers' detective Lord Peter Wimsey and of course, few can shine next to him :D

# 163 I've read the British version of the book which is called 4.50 from Paddington and I don't remember any prosthetics being involved in the story. But I don’t know. The US version which is called, What Mrs. McGillicuddy Saw!, may be different from the British version. Like her Poirot book, Three Act Tragedy was. I've heard publisher's often re-wrote parts of Christie's stories to make them more palatable to the US reader's. But again I don't know for sure.

The Mirror Crack'd from Side to Side by Agatha Christie takes its title from the poem The Lady of Shalott by Lord Alfred Tennyson,

“Out flew the web and floated wide-
The mirror crack'd from side to side;
"The curse is come upon me," cried
The Lady of Shalott.”

The book was first published in the UK by the Collins Crime Club in 1962. In the US it was published by Dodd, Mead and Company in 1963 with the shorter title, The Mirror Crack'd.

With The Mirror Crack'd from Side to Side Miss Marple returns to St. Mary Mead after a long time. St. Mary Mead is Miss Marple’s native village and it is here that she’s at her most comfortable. All the changes in village life are detailed in very enjoyable way. I liked reading about it.

The murder takes place at Gossington Hall. It’s where its owners, the Bantrys, found the body of an exotic blond some 20 years ago in The Body in the Library. And with Gossington Hall returns Mrs. Bantry, one of Miss Marple’s closest friends. She appeared for the first time in The Thirteen Problems, the first Miss Marple stories ever written. It was good to see her once more.

The book has a strange ‘looking back’ feel. Miss Marple spends a lot of time reminiscing about the past of St. Mary Mead. She also reflects on the present state of the village with numerous new people moving in. Any one who is familiar with the earliest Marple novels like The Murder at the Vicarage and The Body in the Library will find these recollections interesting. Both the Colonel Protheroe murder case and the Gossington Hall case are discussed in the story. The fate of some of the familiar reoccurring residents of St. Mary Mead gets revealed in this book.

A row of new houses built in St. Mary Mead, called the ‘Development’ by its older inhabitants, play an important part in the mystery. At first Miss Marple like all of her elderly neighbours is dismayed at the advent of the ‘Development’. But she’s soon appeased when she discovers that ‘Human Nature’ is the same everywhere. Times change, but ‘Human Nature’ remains the same.

Detective-Inspector Dermot Craddock, godson of Sir Henry Clithering, reappears in this book after A Murder Is Announced and 4.50 from Paddington. As in the previous two books he comes for tea and sympathy (or in this case, scotch and sympathy) to Miss Marple.

The central plot is pretty clever. The motive for the crimes is unique and the characters are well developed.

I found Miss Marple’s insistence of knowing what exact words were said by a particular person to be interesting. She asks a host of people about it and amazingly everyone gives the same account but in different wording very single time. It is not until she asks the most unlikely person that she gets the right information.

But as in all of Christie’s latter books this story’s narrative too is filled with many repetitions. For example, the fragile mental state of Marina Gregg is discussed so many times that it gets tedious.

The narrative is not taut. It gets a tad boring at times.

At the end of the book Miss Marple quotes the last three lines of The Lady of Shalott,

He said, "She has a lovely face;
God in his mercy lend her grace,
The Lady of Shalott."

Even though the book is kind of uneven it redeems itself with these last lines, lines that perfectly explain the story and the lives of its main characters.

This is a cleverly written but a rather longish Miss Marple. Recommended for the die hard fans of Agatha Christie and Miss Marple and also for the fans of cozy mysteries.

My monthly ticker update! As of the 31st of May I've read 32 books in the year 2010.

I first came across E.V. Lucas while reading a collection of short stories. His short story, which was indeed a very short one, was called The Face on the Wall. It created quite a deep impression on my mind and I’ve been on the look out ever since for the original collection from which this story came.

After a lot of searching I finally found London Lavender, published in 1912. Now, I expected this to be a short story collection of some sort. But when I started reading it I was considerably taken aback. What was this? Shall I call it slice of life? Or is this another one of Lucas’ essay collections with a touch of fiction? I’m not even sure whether to call this fiction or non-fiction. One thing is for sure, this book is definitely not what I had expected.

E. V. Lucas (1868-1938) was an English essayist, biographer, novelist, and journalist among many other things. He was a successful writer of light-hearted non-fiction. His subject matter ranged from sports to paintings to family life. One of his most noteworthy contributions was a series of scholarly works on Charles Lamb. Lucas was known for his easygoing style of narration. But unfortunately his reputation has gone downhill since his own time. Modern readers have mostly rejected his writings as dull. He has been criticized for being impersonal. His biographers maintain that he was very different from his writings and was a bitter man with a taste for the obscene.

In London Lavender a very loosely co-related series of narratives are recounted by the narrator of the story, Kent Falconer. He is the one thing that is common among the various vignettes. The stories are weird if not unrealistic. But of course some of them are not stories at all. There is a peek in to the development of early cinema. A holiday in Italy. At least three evenings spent at the drawing room of a gentleman discussing contemporary politics, literature and supernatural experiences in real life respectively. A day is spent at the races. Various folk songs and dances are recorded. And then there are the various stories recounted by the characters themselves. Of course there are proper conclusions to some of the stories in the end. The readers are not left hanging. But most of the vignettes do not need a conclusion at all.

And then there are the characters. What a vast array of people! Most of them are so interesting. There is a zoo keeper who is unnaturally attached to ‘apes’ (not monkeys, as he firmly states), a family of delightful young girls (I did not know young women in early 20th century were ever allowed to behave that way), a reluctant ‘Knight’, a couple of ‘modern’ young men and women, a movie director/scriptwriter at the dawn of ‘moving pictures’, a man who becomes a thief by stealing his own property and of course the narrator and his wife.

The writing I found very easy to read. I practically flew through the book.

Lucas’ witty insights and often unorthodox way of looking at things really entertained me. In some places I laughed out loud. Like when the narrator asks a young aviator about his experiences while flying (which in 1912 was a very novel experience indeed),

“What is it like in the air?” I once asked him.

“Ripping," he said.

“But the sensations?” I continued. “How do you feel?"

“Ripping," he said.

“And what does the world look like down below as you rush along?"

“Ripping," he said.

Lucas seems quite liberal towards women. Most of his female characters are strong persons with opinions of their own.

I have only a few complaints about this book. It contains some mild racism and some dull patches. Nothing else really bothered me.

London Lavender was a rather surprising experience for me. Charles Dickens' The Pickwick Papers is the only book I can think of that comes close to the structure of this book. It certainly left me with the same contented feeling that The Pickwick Papers did. London Lavender may easily end up as one of my favourite reads of the year.

(The link to my review is here, http://www.librarything.com/review/60564932)

I love how you are always bringing up classics I've never heard of! It's comparable to Pickwick, you say? *dashes off to add something to her wishlist*

Congrats on your review going Hot, btw!

Never reviewed books and forgotten classics! That seems to be my forte. It all started with my dad’s old books. He has some old plays and short story collections. At an early age after ‘devouring’ all of my own books I went looking for more and found his old ones. It is then that many of the short stories left me wanting more and wondering where they had originally come from. My love for short stories and plays also stem from that. Horror and mystery anthologies are the other sources of my obsession with now forgotten books (like For the Blood Is the Life and Other Stories and The Queen of Hearts).

As for the Pickwick thing that is how the narrative felt to me. You know, loosely connected stories with widely different moods and a nice central character. But in other respects the two books are completely different (except both the authors are British and the setting is in London). :-)

I love your review of the Lucas and have wishlisted it. I laughed at the 'Ripping' quote as well - too funny.

I also discovered your 'Nearly Perfect Books' collection, which I'd never seen before. Fantastic :) Interesting that you put Pale Horse and Parker Pyne Investigates in there - I've always thought of them as being lightweight Christies and must admit I've never even read them. I guess I should!

>167 Porua:: Porua, London Lavender looks like a "ripping" good book! I enjoyed your review as always. If you say it may end up as your favorite book, that's good enough for me.

I've added it to my wish list....and I've added "ripping" to my vocabulary! Oh heck, I might as well add The Pickwick Papers while I'm at it. It's about time for another Dickens read.

I'm off to a big book sale in Kansas City tomorrow. Wish me luck!

Porua, I've wishlisted London Lavendar as well. Great review.

Porua, considering you are basically the Ultimate Agatha Christie fan, what's your take on And Then There Were None? I read it recently (my second of her books) and was interested in your opinion. For reference, I posted some of my thoughts in review form.

I've been reading your thread with pleasure for a while now, but I believe this is the first time that I've posted here.

*waves to Porua, who hasn't been about for awhile*

Hello everyone! I’m back! The last two weeks have been hell. Now I can finally breathe and take it easy.

# 170 Hi, Muse! Thank you so much for liking my review. Isn’t the ‘ripping’ quote funny? I laughed out loud after reading it.

And regarding the Nearly Perfect Books, here comes my personal ‘feeling’ thing again! My collections reflect how I ‘feel’ about the books and what ratings I give them, not literary merit. My Nearly Perfect Books collection contains my four star books, books I’ve enjoyed immensely but has one or two very minor flaws. It has the classic play The Playboy of the Western World on one hand and on the other hand it has something like Parker Pyne Investigates.

# 171 Thank you so much, Donna! I really enjoy your reviews too. I just LOVE The Pickwick Papers. Hope you get around to reading it soon. How did the book sale go?

# 172 Always glad to be able to add fresh books to all of my friend’s wihlists. :-)

# 173 Oh yeah I’m probably the biggest Agatha Christie ‘nut’ around here. Surprisingly, I haven’t read And then there were none, the novel. So, can’t really comment on that. The play I’ve read though. And I really liked it. The atmosphere of fear and anxiety was really palpable. But like you’ve said in your review the play and the novel are different in many ways. May have to get to the novel soon. Great review, btw!

# 174 Hi, Amy! It feels good to be back!

You call yourself an 'AC Nut' yet you haven't read And Then There Were None? ;-) How is that possible? I thought that was the book she was most famous for? Or maybe that's because it was one of the only AC's I've read, plus the plot made such a huge impact on me.

# 176 Agatha Christie did write an awful lot of books. Why if one tries to read all of her Poirot short stories (which I’ve done) one may find that there are about fifty plus of them. So, I decided to focus on her Marple and Poirot books. Her plays (like And Then There Were None, the play) and short stories (like the Parker Pyne ones) are also my favourites. Having read all of that I simply did not have time for reading all of her non-series books (like Crooked House or And Then There Were None) or any of her light hearted Tommy and Tuppence ones. But I’m still very young. I’ll get round to them. Eventually. ;-)

#175 - Thanks! I'll have to read (or see!) the play at some point. I watched an old 40s movie version a couple days ago that was partially based on the stage version, and I didn't particularly like the "happy" ending—but I've heard the play has a different "happy" ending from the movies, and a much better one at that. Sounds like the play finds the perfect balance between the darkness of the book and the sheer entertainment of the movie.

>175 Porua: - about 'feeling' about books, I think the way one feels about a book is a hugely important factor, and even Illustrius Murr has lightweight stuff in his "really great books" collection such as I capture the castle. I guess I meant I thought I'd neither admire OR enjoy those particular ACs. I now intend to go ahead and investigate the books for myself, like Parker Pyne himself :)

Tommy and Tuppence books are mostly a lot of fun, once you embrace them as so completely a potboiler type that it's almost a parody of a potboiler thriller adventure story. I don't know if AC meant them as a parody or not (which means it wouldn't be a great parody if it is one) but they could be.

Wow, that was a confusingly complicated paragraph.

*mutters 'parody' several times and reaches for a cup of tea*

#178 I like reading plays because I somehow feel more involved with the narrative. Some people get distracted by all the dialogues going back and forth, all of the different characters and the minute description of every little detail. But for me all the little details makes the story come alive. I can almost see it all unfold right in front of my eyes. This works even better with mysteries, especially Agatha Christie mysteries. As it is she wrote really gripping mysteries that pull you right in to the narrative. With her plays I feel this quality only gets heightened. The same goes for And Then There Were None. I felt the eeriness of the whole situation even more keenly. That is why I loved reading the play so much. Although my favourite Christie play remains Appointment with Death, another one of her novels turned plays.

#179 I have to say I’m getting a lot of grief because of my whole ‘feelings’ theory (not from you, Muse. You’re nice :-} ). A while back some one got ticked off because I had placed a certain book in my Books of No Importance collection which I reserve for books I do not like and therefore have not rated. Please, I’m not saying the books themselves are NOT important. Like I said it has nothing to do with literary merit. I mean the books in that collection are not important to ME. A few days ago someone else got ticked off because I gave a certain book only one star saying that it was misleading. What I mean by one star is that it is an above average book, not a bad one because I don’t give any stars to books I don’t like. And this was not the first time someone disliked my way of rating a book. But seriously come on folks, these are after all my books and my collections. Why can’t I use and arrange the books and the collections my own way? I mean I use LT firstly for my own pleasure and then for other people’s benefit. I do have a right to use them as I see fit. It is not like I’m breaking any rules or anything.

Coming back to Agatha Christie, I haven’t read any of the Tommy and Tuppence mysteries yet but I’m interested in one of their books called By the Pricking of My Thumbs. The plot synopsis seems creepy. Have you read that one, Muse?

>179 ChocolateMuse:: When I first joined, I wasn't in a group; I was just rating for myself. I had this whole food analogy (comfort foods, gourmet meals, snacks...) going on which I still sort of like. But then I was also starring books based on how many times I had read a book--that should be a good indicator of how much I liked a book, right? But that didn't work for new books, so I started giving the really great books stars for the number of times I thought I would read the books in my life time... Pretty soon, I gave up on the whole star rating thing for my own library--I'm just too indecisive, plus I couldn't figure out how to reconcile feelings about books I had read 30+ years ago with the books I was currently reading without rereading the older books. I still have my "favorites" collection, though, which should give people a good idea of the kinds of books I like.

Anyway, enough about me! ;-) The point I'm trying to get around to is I really enjoy hearing how people choose to rate their books, and it should make sense/work for them. My rating was all about feelings too, but it wouldn't matter to me if yours wasn't. How you rate tells me something about you, so I want to hear that.

Hey, Porua I still like ya and I promise I won't get all bent out of shape if we don't agree. I understand the feelings thing 'cause that's the way I am too!

I very seldom rate classics, because there haven't been too many that I like and I don't want someone to have an apoplectic fit because I didn't give something or other a high enough rating! Keep doing what you're doing! --- Tammy

Hey Porua, I just stopped by and was reading some of the posts and decided I wanted to comment. I also use feeling when rating and reviewing books. If a book is a classic that doesn't mean that I am going to love the book more. I think feelings play an integral part in rating books not just how well written the book is.

I recently went on an AC kick (last year). I have always wanted to read her stories because everyone raves about them and I have seen some of the shows for her books on the television. I don't remember all the books I have read. I do know that I read Elephants Can Remember, that was the first book I read by Agatha Christie. Since reading that book I have purchased many of the books from Borders to start my collection. I have not read And Then There were None. Now I think my next book will be an AC book...

Happy Reading!!

Monic'a aka crazy4reading

I never use star ratings, just precisely because it's so meaningless. I know for myself what I think of a book; and how many stars I put down conveys almost nothing to anyone else because of all the ambiguity. Also, it's so complicated - I never know whether to rate according to feeling, or according to thought, or if I thought it was done well but didn't enjoy it, or if it's a comfort read or something like Middlemarch.

So I review, but I don't rate. Mostly, anyway.

You know Porua, apropos of nothing, I always picture you like the girl in the pic in your first post.

Oh and I forgot to say, yes I have read By the pricking of my thumbs. It does get quite creepy. It's quite a good one.

Despite the popular assumption that plays can only be performed, and not read, I to occasionally enjoy reading them in book form. I'll keep my eyes open for Christie's plays. Meanwhile, I look forward to hearing your opinion of the novel And Then There Were None, whenever you get to it, along with By the Pricking of My Thumbs.

I love rating, even though it's completely arbitrary. So I'm a bundle of contradictions - so what?

Thank you all for sharing your views about rating books and my whole ‘feeling’ theory! I really appreciate it. :-)

#182 “...plus I couldn't figure out how to reconcile feelings about books I had read 30+ years ago with the books I was currently reading without rereading the older books. I still have my "favorites" collection, though, which should give people a good idea of the kinds of books I like.”

Oh yes I have the same problem with books that I had read a long time ago. There are certain books that I loved when I first read them. But as I’ve grown up and have become a more discerning reader my feeling about them have changed. Also, there are books I didn’t understand when I first read them. Case in point, The Great Gatsby. So, low rated books may become high rated and highly rated books may have to come down a notch. I cannot decide without re-reading them. But like you my Favourites collection may give a good idea of what I like.

#183 “I very seldom rate classics, because there haven't been too many that I like and I don't want someone to have an apoplectic fit because I didn't give something or other a high enough rating!”

That was exactly the reason the whole Books of No Importance thing started. I had placed a certain ‘revered’ classic in that collection. That is what ticked that person off because s/he thinks calling it not important is blasphemous.

And I still like ya, too! ;-)

#184 “I think feelings play an integral part in rating books not just how well written the book is.”

Yes, that is my view too. I’m merely an ordinary reader talking about the books I’ve read and what I’ve gotten out of them. Rating them is one of the ways I express that.

Did you enjoy Elephants Can Remember? It was one of the last of the books Christie wrote. Not one of my favourites but it does feature my beloved Mrs. Oliver. My first Christie was Sparkling Cyanide, I think. Happy Reading to you too!!

#185 & 186 “You know Porua, apropos of nothing, I always picture you like the girl in the pic in your first post.

Funny you should say that, Muse. Actually, I do kind of look like the girl in that picture. That is one of the reasons I like it.

Good to know about By the Pricking of My Thumbs. Will surely be looking for it.

#187 “I love rating, even though it's completely arbitrary. So I'm a bundle of contradictions - so what?”

Hear, hear!

Finished re-reading and reviewing the last three of the Miss Marple books. Here are the first two of the reviews. A Caribbean Mystery and At Bertrams Hotel. Enjoy!

A Caribbean Mystery by Agatha Christie was published in the UK by the Collins Crime Club in 1964 and in the US by Dodd, Mead and Company in 1965.

The atmosphere and setting of A Caribbean Mystery could not be more different than the more standard Miss Marple mysteries. The balmy days and the colourful nights of the Caribbean island is a far cry from the misty mornings and the icy evenings of St. Mary Mead.

It is during these warm days that an old major tells long winded, boring tales of the years gone by. Most people, including Miss Marple, pay little attention to them. Except the old soldier dies unexpectedly after wanting to show Miss Marple the picture of a killer. Now Miss Marple must use the power of conversation to sort through the mass of stories the major told to find that one story that could lead her to a most desperate and dangerous killer.

This is one of those Marple stories in which I failed to realize who the killer was. I was taken in by the killer’s misdirection just like the characters in the book. Although the killer’s motive is a very common one the way he goes about creating an elaborate labyrinth of lies is interesting to say the least.

In this novel Miss Marple is very much in charge. She does all of the sneaking around and sleuthing herself.

And of course their is her trademark gossip. Miss Marple always (very rightly) believes in the power of conversation and of what it can reveal about people. Nowhere is it more needed than in A Caribbean Mystery. Major Palgrave, the lone person who actually knew something important is killed off fairly early. The only way to find out what he wanted to tell is to learn more about his stories. Unfortunately, most of the people found his stories to be incredibly dull and repetitive. Consequently, no one paid any attention to them. So, it is an uphill task for Miss Marple.

Among the characters of the story, Mr. Jason Rafiel definitely stands out. The grouchy old tyrant becomes a most unlikely ally to Miss Marple’s elderly sleuth. In fact, Mr. Rafiel re-appears in Nemesis, the last Miss Marple novel Christie ever wrote. The Dysons and the Hillingdons are stock characters and are o.k.

Once again, another hysterical, romantic, clingy woman is created by Christie. I’m not going to say who it is because her identity is one of the twists of the story. But even in the end, when it is evident that Miss Marple has unmasked the true killer, she refuses to believe it and is very ungrateful about it afterwards. Seriously, is there any woman out there who is that stupid and short sighted? I find it very hard to believe.

One thing I enjoyed in this book is the importance of Major Palgrave’s stories and how no one realized it till Miss Marple pointed it out. Not only did his stories reveal the identity of a murderer but the killer also got many of his diabolical ideas from them.

Reading A Caribbean Mystery was a very gratifying experience. I enjoyed it for its unique setting and interesting characters. Recommended.

At Bertrams Hotel by Agatha Christie was first published in the UK by the Collins Crime Club in 1965 and in the US by Dodd, Mead and Company in 1966.

Bertrams Hotel on Pond Street surprised Miss Marple. She remembers staying there as a girl. The hotel had an air of respectability, a highly traditional atmosphere and of course great service. But all of that was more than fifty years ago. How can it all be the same after so many years? Has time really stood still at the Bertrams or is it something more simple (and sinister) than that?

This is very much unlike the regular Miss Marple mysteries. Here we leave the cosy comfort of the mostly homespun murders we’re used to and follow the track of an international criminal ring. But there is the parallel mystery of the attempted murder of a young girl so we’re not totally bereft of the quintessential Miss Marple charm.

All of the characters are kind of unusual for a Miss Marple mystery. Lady Bess Sedgwick, the daredevil, seems unreal. Elvira Blake is cold and calculative. She has a creepy vibe to her. Chief-Inspector Fred Davy is a fatherly figure and his personality goes well with the world of Miss Marple mysteries.

Canon Pennyfather is entertaining. I enjoyed reading about his awkward predicaments. Also, he plays a pretty crucial part in the solution of the mystery. I found it funny the way Mrs. McCrae and Archdeacon Simmons go about looking for him.

The plot of the story, especially the whole robbery racket and race car driving parts, are rather implausible. Not that there aren’t some mildly enjoyable parts even there. The Elvira Blake track is more familiar Christie territory. I liked the way Christie describes the interaction between Elvira and Bridget.

As this is a ‘late’ Christie the writing does feel a little rusty. But there is still that odd spark here and there lighting up the narrative. Like Miss Marple at a restaurant and later at the Bettersea Park overhearing snippets of conversation and deducing from them a tangled plot.

Like most of the later Miss Marple’s At Bertrams Hotel has a strange ‘looking back’ feel to it. As Miss Marple (and Christie herself) grows older she reminisces of the way things use to be and the way things are. A strange sense of nostalgia and sadness for a past that can never come back fills the later Miss Marple books. This one is no exception. In At Bertrams Hotel Miss Marple roams around London and remembers her childhood visits. The changes sadden her. But she is also practical enough to see that nothing can stay the same and if it does there must be something amiss.

I do not particularly enjoy the later Christie books. Most of them seem rambling and boring. But At Bertrams Hotel is one of the better later Marple books. I definitely enjoyed reading it.

Ooh, how timely. I had a too-much-heavy-reading moment the other night and picked up At Bertram's Hotel to relax with. I've read it before, but like you I'm not a big fan of the later Marples, so I hadn't re-read it too many times. I think it's because part of Christie's charm for me is the old fashioned flavour - and those latter Marples of course miss it. Can't get into Third Girl for instance - never finished it. And The mirror crack'd from side to side is just depressing.

So, not finished it yet, and can't remember everything about how the plot goes, which is lovely!

One element I hadn't picked up on last time was the fact that poor old Pennyfather actually must have a serious case of Alzheimers - but it's presented as being funny in the book, which raises my eyebrows a tad. He's an endearing character though.

#193 I have read Third Girl. I liked it better than other late Poirots. Now, Elephants Can Remember and The Clocks are BAD. So agonizingly boring! Have you read any of those?

“...can't remember everything about how the plot goes, which is lovely!”

Yes it is lovely when you can’t remember how the plot of a book you’ve once read goes and you get to discover it all over again!

So ends my Miss Marple marathon. I’ve enjoyed chronologically re-reading and reviewing them. Here is the review of the last of the Miss Marple book ever written, Nemesis.

Nemesis was the last Miss Marple novel written by Agatha Christie, although Sleeping Murder was the last published one. The book was published in the UK by the Collins Crime Club in 1971 and in the US by Dodd, Mead and Company the same year.

Miss Marple investigates a murder that took place years ago after a friend asks for her help from beyond the grave.

The motive reminds me a lot of an early Christie short story The Herb of Death from The Thirteen Problems and also a little of Sleeping Murder.

Mr Jason Rafiel, Miss Marple’s ally from A Caribbean Mystery, makes an appearance in Nemesis. His secretary Esther Walters also reappears.

Among the characters Elizabeth Temple reminds me of Honoria Bulstrode from the Hercule Poirot mystery, Cat Among the Pigeons. The characters of Clotilde and Anthea are kind of interesting.

The book has a rambling, incoherent feel to it. Like most late Christie mysteries it is just so repetitive! The same thing is said again and again. Boring and unnecessary.

It is a pity really. The story has so much promise. From the startling request from beyond the grave to the lack of any tangible clues and only a few vague indications about where to look for them this book could have been so exciting. It could have been a shining example of Miss Marple’s sharp intellect. But the plot simply meanders along.

Even my favourite Miss Marple seems dull in this book.

This is probably my least favourite Miss Marple novel. A typical late Christie that not only fails to grip me but also bores me at places.

Miss Marple certainly deserved a better final case. Read Nemesis only if you are a hardcore Agatha Christie fans like me.

Great review of Nemesis. The BBC adaptation is good, but bears little resemblance to the actual plot.

I didn't mind The Clocks too much - I think the neighbours made the whole thing more interesting for me. But Elephants... hah, no way. I put it down after about the third page and never got any further.

I'd forgotten that Third Girl was a Poirot, I was thinking it was a Marple. Hows about Hallowe'en Party? Now that was a rushed job - Poirot doesn't even have a token accent in that one, and the whole way it was written was so dreadful that I abandoned that one too.

I finished Bertram's last night. It was a fun read after all.

#197 “Great review of Nemesis.”

Thank you! :-)

“The BBC adaptation is good, but bears little resemblance to the actual plot.”

That is exactly my issue with literary adaptations. I was saying at another thread how most adaptations manage to mutilate and disfigure the original plots beyond recognition. It makes my heart bleed!

I had forgotten about Halloween Party. That wasn’t that good either. It was so boring that I got a headache. But as usual I finished it.

“...Poirot doesn't even have a token accent in that one...”

Yes, that’s correct, although some sort of excuse is given for that during the course of the book. Even my favourite Mrs Oliver couldn’t save Halloween Party and Elephants Can Remember.

Glad you’ve had fun while reading At Bertrams Hotel.

Porua,

I enjoyed Elephants Can Remember. I need to read some of her older works to compare the writing style. Is there a list of her books in order? Just wondering.

Happy reading!! :)

#199 When in doubt I always consult Wikipedia. They may have a good chronological list of all of the Agatha Christie mysteries. As for me, I have the Agatha Christie collection from HarperCollins, where all of the books had a chronological list printed on the back of it. I simply followed that list when I originally began reading Christie.

I personally think her works that are too early like from the 20’s are not that good. The works from 1930 to 1949 are excellent, her best period, in my opinion. The 1950’s are good. But things go downhill from the 60’s

Of course there are exceptions. Like The Pale Horse is from 1961. Sleeping Murder from 1976 is excellent but it was originally written in the 40’s.

Hope this helps. Happy reading to you too!

Porua, do you mind telling my what the excuse/reason was for Poirot's lack of accent? I'm never going to read it to find out...

Also, I should clarify my probably rather cryptic mention of neighbours in #197 - I meant that in the book, we investigate the people who live in houses near where the crime takes place. I found them interesting - the lady with the cats, and the harrassed mother of those energetic boys. Not my Real Life neighbours. :)

And I did the leg work for the chronological list of Christie works.

I enjoyed reading your recent reviews, especially the two for A Caribbean Mystery and Nemesis, since (as you know) I have them in a recently-purchased Marple volume. BTW, what's your opinion on The Moving Finger, Marple maven that you are? I have that one in yet another volume.

EDIT: Never mind; just found your review.

I just found the review too, and had missed it before. Here, for anyone interested: http://www.librarything.com/work/3009/reviews/57965984

I agree in one sense that it's annoying that Marple only arrives near the end, but on the other hand, I think the narrator is an excellent one, and the book in my opinion would stand up fine without Marple at all. In fact, I don't really count it as a Marple story, but more as one of those stand-alones.

I'd always figured the title was a quote, but didn't know where from, so thanks for that Porua!

Also, I once watched a visually breathtaking adaptation on You Tube, Part 1 here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMoTOnylf7M - Megan bears a startling resemblance to Audrey Hepburn, and is way too pretty, and once again, sorry Porua, there are some deviations from the plot. But I did enjoy it.

The Moving Finger is one of my better-liked Christies.

Regarding plot deviations in movies, I have mixed feelings. I did a couple of semesters of film script writing at uni, and learned there that movies generally have fiercely exact plot prescriptions. Scriptwriters have to bend their plots to fit the central point or premise, and the 12 steps of the hero's journey, and stuff like that. The rambling way many novels work just wouldn't hold up on screen.

But sometimes, the changes seem just plain vicious, and then I resent them!

Thank you ChocolateMuse for finding the list. I just printed it off so that I can have it available at my fingertips.

#201 I don't remember what was exactly said but Poirot said something about being able to speak fairly good English. Exaggerating his accent a little to enhance his foreignness. People speak to foreigners more easily that to others he said.

Hmm... Was this in Hallowe'en Party? Or wait; was it in Three Act Tragedy? Now, I'm confused. See, that's what happens when you read too many Poirot mysteries!

#202 I like The Moving Finger. One of my favourite Marples. I enjoyed the 'atmosphere' of the novel.

#203 "I'd always figured the title was a quote, but didn't know where from, so thanks for that Porua!"

You are welcome! And thanks for the Youtube link.

Yeah I do understand that adapting a book is very hard work. Not everything that works in a book may work in a movie. But still I very much prefer to know what the writer's original take is as s/he is the creator of the work. That is why I'd rather read a book than watch an adaptation. :-)

#204 Glad you've found what you were looking for. I hope you enjoy Christie as much as I do.

I have decided to start a new thread since the first six months of the year 2010 are up and my 50 book challenge thread has finally ‘crawled’ up to 200+ posts. Plus, I’m kind of bored.

So, without much further ado here is the link to my new thread,

http://www.librarything.com/topic/94041

See you all there! :-)