Emma - both book and new adaptation

I was listening to NPR one afternoon and a piece on blogging started. I snorted when the commentator said that blogs must "be kept up daily - it is a duty".

Duty my left foot - this is my first entry of 2010!

I am finding facebook a welcome way to keep up with friends and their thoughts/ideas. Still, I want to try to keep up with my blogging habit in some way and decided to re-read Emma (by Jane Austen) and give a critque.

To start, my first encounters with Emma were through film - "Clueless", "Emma" with Gwenth Paltrow, and "Emma" with Kate Beckensale. I liked the films - I found it a funny and well done plot. The character of Emma was so entirely stupid, she was charming.

When I began reading Emma, however, I found it less appealing. Unlike the other Jane Austen novels, there is more dialog. It almost reads like a script - two characters get a chapter and converse. Typical of Jane Austen, there is little description - one must create the setting and her language gives your mind ideas of a characters expression/posture.

The dialog itself would not be unappealing if it were not for characters like Miss Bates. Anytime she begins to speak it is best to skip ahead to where the quotes end. Jane Austen no doubt choose to "let" Miss Bates talk instead of perpetually saying that Miss Bates "went on and on about a topic that no one found particularly intersting and that she did not illumine so that it might be interesting."

I do feel for Miss Bates however - I fear I can be just as verbose and boring. My own mother said of my blog that "she could not read that much."

Then along came the new series on PBS. The first night I found a bit interesting - it gave a lot of unnecessary backstory. The backstory however brought up a lot of interesting character parallels. I never once considered that Emma, Frank Churchill, and Jane Fairfax grew up motherless. What that says of the rest of the novel, I do not know, but it was interesting that the new visual adapation made me ponder this fact.

The second night was slightly better - the story speed up, Emma (played by Rommola Garai) continued to charm. But I still was not totally engrossed.

The last night of the series just plain made me mad! There were additional scenes, conversations that never took place - it was sloppy. Not as bad as the recent version of Persuasion where Anne Elliot was a marathon runner at the end, but pretty darn close. I don't think Jane Fairfax and Emma Woodhouse would ever have a heart to heart about Frank's behavior - but there it was, bold as brass.

It stunk to high heaven.

And I was not sure what to make of Mr. Knightly and Emma looking at the white cliffs of Dover as they headed out on their honeymoon. It was odd.

I will say this about all adaptions of Emma - whoever they get to play Mrs. Elton is always DEAD ON. Perhaps because her character is such a, well, character, it is easy to portray. But even the costuming for her in the adaption was perfect - too much lace, ribbon, and ruffles. They even had her on a donkey. Priceless.

But a well played Mrs. Elton does not a good adapation of Emma make and I would suggest skipping it if you have not already.

This Is What SHOULD Happen...

I have a lot of girl students who really love Twlight. Some of them get quite upset that I do not enjoy the series and prefer Harry Potter.

Whatever - I couldn't read much of Twlight in Barnes and Noble without throwing up.

Thanks to my friend Katy, I have also been introduced to Buffy - another series that totally pwns Twlight

So, this video that I enjoyed via Meg Cabot's Twitter CRACKED ME UP!!!



Hee!

I also enjoyed a blog post by the author that states that his purpose for the video is to point out that women get these deluded ideas from literature that guys need to be obssessed with them in order for their relationship to be romantic.

And that is what I fear is happening to young girls who read these books. They get stupid ideas about how boys behave and what to expect in relationships. Girls need to be stronger than that! And should always carry a wooden stake with them at all times...just sayin'.

So Mr. Rawn was right!

Ha!

Take the Quiz here!

You Are...Elizabeth Bennet!

You are Elizabeth Bennet of Pride & Prejudice! You are intelligent, witty, and tremendously attractive. You have a good head on your shoulders, and oftentimes find yourself the lone beacon of reason in a sea of ridiculousness. You take great pleasure in many things. You are proficient in nearly all of them, though you will never own it. Lest you seem too perfect, you have a tendency toward prejudgement that serves you very ill indeed.


Why Mr. Rawn was right:

When a friend of mine told a tutor (who thought the world of my hubby), that LG and I were serious and thinking about marriage, he said:

"Well, Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth Bennett ended up together."

!!!

At the time I remember being puzzled - who was Darcy? Who was Eliza?

Guess it was me!


Though, I am a bit shocked to see someone has a site DEVOTED to Emma adaptations. Seriously. The order of Jane Austen novels IS as follows:

1. Persuasion
2. Pride and Prejudice
3. Sense and Sensibility
4. Mansfield Park
5. Juvenalia and other assorted writings
6. Northanger Abby
7. Emma

Oh well, stranger sites have been started on line.

A New Year...

...and I guess it is finally time for a new post.

I just spent the past *hour* on itunes looking for songs.

Seriously - I can't get enough music. And I just got the new Squirrel Nut Zippers album for Christmas (Bedlam Ballroom). It is very good - little salsa style in there. Lots of fun to dance to in the kitchen while cooking.

I am also finding...that I like Amy Winehouse. Seriously - girl has a voice. I just might have to buy one of her songs.

And, I am also liking another version of "The First Cut is the Deepest". I have the Cat Stevens, but this other one I found is more interesting. I do not like the Sheryl Crow version.

And I finished watching Tess of the D'ubervilles. GO TO PBS NOW AND VIEW IT!!!

So good...I mean totally watered down, but REALLY good.

It did, however, make me scream not so polite things at the screen. One example would be when I yelled "HIT HIM AGAIN!". El hubbster told me to take a chill pill. And also when the hubbster asked for a description of Alec D'uberville (because he wondered in half way through and got into it and wanted to know more)
and I explained

***warning - my explanation is quite explicit. The faint of heart should look for the next set of ****'s *****

that he was a man who deserved "to be headbutted and then have his balls cut off."

I was told that my description was quite crass. Good thing I didn't mention how he should then be decapitated and his head shoved on a spike with the detached genitalia shoved in his corpsey mouth.

:| What?

Fine - I am being crass. Please forgive me. (though I refuse to edit this post - Alec D'uberville at least got his comeuppance).


********end explicit**************

And I saw "Doubt" and "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button".

:|

I had snow days - what else was I supposed to do!

Doubt was alright - I liked the cast a lot. Meryl Streep should be in every movie - she is AMAZING. And Amy Adams is made of awesome. So is Phillip Seymour Hoffman. I like how they let the movie be just like the play - it has a wonderful ending and it is true to the title.

The CC of BB was made of lame. First of all - I did NOT go to see the movie because of BP. No...see this post for why.

I went to see it because I love Cate Blanchet. Is she not gorgeous? And she can ACT! She made the film.

Otherwise it was just like Forrest Gump if FG was born old.

And I saw Quantum of Solace. It was alright - a bit of loose ties to be tied. Bond is...em. Well, Daniel Craig and Ralph Finnes are my only blond-blue-eyed crushes. *blushes*

Other wise QoS was lame. Daniel Craig was not at ALL.

So, I am also amused by the amount of fan fiction writing I have done - which is none! I need to work on getting it out of my system because I just have all these stories playing around in my head.

Which brings up something I have read - the LAST book in the Princess Diaries Series.

:(

I know - the LAST ONE!

I really like Princess Mia. I don't think I like her decisions in this book, but I really like her. And I am glad that it ended well. The lack of detail in one scene made me want to write PD fan fic! But I refuse since it would be like Ransom of My Heart, the romantic novel Princess Mia "writes".

Yes I read it.

:|

I read it and am affirmed the romance novels are NOT my favorite.

One thing about the last book I adored is how Princess Mia made out in a horse drawn carriage -- that was super cute (I am trying not to give away spoilers in case peeps reading this want to read it).

Oh, I saw Kill Bill (1 and 2). I like Quentin Tarantino - I do. But I don't like the violence...and the misogyny that is trying to disguise itself as feminism. I am disturbed that most females in his move are psycho, physically violent, and extraordinarily beautiful. It just isn't real life.

And as I try to separate the film from the violence, I find what is at the heart of movies I love.

I love interesting characters. I love REALLY quirky characters.

I like unusual plot lines where it is almost predictable what will happen, but then it takes a twist that leads to a more satisfactory ending.

I like stories that are true to the human experience. And I love little details that become vital at the end ('cause I pay attention to little details, but speak in generalities -- basically if I had to give a detailed account it would be TOO detailed).

So, Tarantino appeals to me in the plot. The characters - meh. But his plots are AMAZING!

Wow - this has been a random post - lots of reviews. I would love to hear others opinions in the comments!

5 Random Things

In no particular order:

1. Harry, A History - This was a really nice look back at the past ten years of the Harry Potter fandom. I especially liked hearing Jo Rowling's point of view. Melissa Anelli, of Leaky fame, did an excellent job with this book. If you would like to borrow the book, let me know.

One thing that intrigued was a comment JKR made about Dumbledore losing Grindelwald, his former object of affection.

She explained that he just turned inward and remained isolated and academic the rest of this life. "Does that mean he as a one-hundred-fifty-year-old virgin? I don't know," she said softly, peering into her coffee cup as though he held an answer.

When I read this passage, the Sev/Lily fangirl in me quickly jumped to conclusions. Could Dumbledore's experience be similar to Snape's? It would seem possible given what we know of Snape from the books - especially since Dumbledore agrees to meet with Snape after Snape passed info onto Voldy...perhaps he saw in Snape a similar need to protect the one he loved?

Hmmm...I will have to think more about this. I would LOVE to ask JKR about how Lily and Snape felt AFTER they parted ways in fifth year towards each other. I can write my own conclusions, but I would love to know what she envisioned.

2. Lord of the Rings Directors Cut (a.k.a. "Deluxe Precious Edition")

Me wants it.

I borrowed the set of three DVDs from an HP meetup friend (super cool and generous). I am THOROUGHLY enjoying it - it has the full film, with effects and music added in, behind the scenes look at how the whole film came together, and commentaries by everyone involved (well, I didn't see the key grip's commentaries, but that is ok - really!).

There were many more songs in the original. Which is kinda cool because they are WAY shorter than in the book.

Small confession - I skipped the songs when reading the series. WHAT! They were a weensy bit boring to me...

Also, El Hubarino (LG) started watching it with me and I have to pause it every 20 minutes or so to explain the plot.

Maybe if he watches it a third time through, he will get the connections.

Then again, he did see it in the theatre the first time and could not remember if Frodo lives.

:|

Seriously - he asked me yesterday if Frodo lives -and he has seen these movies before!!!

The one thing the hubbster won't watch with me is all of the "Making of" features. I LOVE THESE - they make me want to become a movie craftsperson! I can paint things, and link plastic chain mail, and...hold a cord, or something.

3. Which brings be to TEACHING - I do love it despite above sentences. Teaching is never boring and you get better over time.

I applied to Seattle University, am accepted, and will soon begin studies to earn my professional certification (which is the same thing as a licence). It will take me a year and half to complete.

:|

So, I will be at my job for another year...I hope...

I mean...I hope I don't get the boot.

My principal seems ok with me lately, despite my goals meeting which ended ok, but I still had to call the hubbster in tears over it.

:(

Still, things are going ok NOW, and I have to focus on that.

4. I am making Christmas gifts - which is a lot of fun. My embroidered tea towels are getting MUCH better. I would post them here, but some of you might be getting them as gifts and I want them to be a surprise.

They are fun to make and the crocheted bags are coming along nicely too.

That is all - oh wait.

This just in -

5. Obama reads Twilight with his daughters.

Ew. Twilight is a piece of poo. Seriously - I have read excerpts because that is all I could stomach. In the words of Smegol, "It burns us!".

I am disappointed - but I guess nobody is perfect!

Neil Gaiman: Not Just a Pretty Face

Perhaps some of my friends had spoken of Neil Gaiman before, but the name did not stick anywhere in my conscience.  I missed that recommendation or suggestion.

Over a year ago I saw the preview for Stardust, a new feature film.  I was intrigued by the fantasy elements as well as the humor in the trailer.  A few girls (literally, high school age) at church praised Stardust the movie as well as the book.

I picked up a copy of Stardust (novel version, I did not know it was also available in graphic novel/picture book format) at a buy 1 get 1 free promotional table.  I put it on my bookshelf and it waited.

I saw the movie Stardust on a plane ride...or was it train ride....I cannot remember.  Either way, I saw the film and liked it.

I went home and saw the copy of the novel on the bookshelf.  I walked past it.  It waited.

This summer, on a whim, I pulled the copy of Stardust off the shelf and put it in the summer-reading-stack by my bed.

Here was the stack:

The Guy Not Taken

Good in Bed

Mrs. Dalloway

Wuthering Heights

Crime and Punishment

Stardust

Sense and Sensibility

Perhaps you have read my review of 71.4% (approx.) of this initial stack and know I was on the look out for more Neil Gaiman.  And I think I mentioned it in a previous post.  Anyhow, Crime and Punishment goes unread (see, I threw on the stack S & S because I couldn't get past the first chapter of C & P...I was hoping to read them simultaneously because I needed to balance the angsty Russian literature with some dry English wit.  Well, it didn't work.  I moved on.)

I actually read Decline and Fall by Waugh (what? I was waiting for Brideshead Revisited to come up on my queue at the library!).  It is a REALLY funny novel and even MORE FUNNY if you are a teacher.  Good times! (Though I am not sure if that was Waugh's goal in writing this particular novel...)

Well, to keep my ramble short, I read Stardust, liked it (kinda, click here) and wanted to read more by Neil Gaiman.  At a trip to Powells, Kate recommended I read Smoke and Mirrors, a collection of his short stories.  I thought I would give that a go rather than wait till fall to get my classroom in order and find my copy of Coraline.

Smoke and  Mirrors is....good...um...interesing...actually... good.  In The Guy Not Taken, Jennifer Weiner has this section at the end where she writes a little bit about each of the short stories in the book.  Neil Gaiman does the same (but at the start) and it is REALLY fascinating for me to read what inspired his work and to read about his process.  

One story, fairly...uh...er...

Ahem.

Ok, he describes one particular story as...well...  Either way I was INCREDIBLY UNCOMFORTABLE reading it.  It was like reading The Secret History of the Pink Carnation.  

I thought TSHotPC was going to be a HISTORY NOVEL...but there is a reason historical romances are filed in the ROMANCE section.  I was EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE reading it because there was very little history and a lot of...yeh. (In my defense I found the book in the fiction section and not on the shelves with airbrushed Fabio pictures.)

So, I read this VERY uncomfortable story thinking "oh crap, what the heck is this?  I was happily reading about werewolves and other totally messed up...what the heck?  I mean the shrunken testicles on the beach in that one sea-monster vs. werewolf story was messed up but this is...whoa, do people really do this kind of stuff?"

Then I read his author's note. HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!  HA!

Neil Gaiman said he blushed most of the time writing it and it took him four years to finish it due to the blushing.  So glad I am not the only one who has difficulty writing scenes like that.  I have a story in my head about Severus Snape and I REALLY don't want to write it because there is some really messed up $#*! happening and other...things...that I don't feel comfortable writing about. 

(The Truth: I was hoping Crime and Punishment would help we write that story, but it has not.  I just got depressed by the first chapter.)

And I KNOW I READ JENNIFER WEINER and she has some scenes that are WAAAAAAAY "whoa!" but for some reason I can read those and be ok.  She is writing from a woman's perspective and I can understand that.  Neil Gaiman on the other hand...

He writes well.  He writes so well in fact that I am...unnerved?  Disgusted?  Shocked?  I don't know quite how to describe the squirmy sensation and slight nausea that comes with reading the male perspective of intimacy.  It is so...ew.  

Seriously: EEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWW!

Is this really how guys think?  If so, my thoughts of what how Severus Snape would react are TOTALLY off.

What was equally fascinating about Neil Gaiman is an essay he wrote about writing have a gender.  He assigns a gender to his work.  He saw Stardust as a girl's book.  Well, as a girl, I was not entirely satisfied by the characterization in the novel, but that only helps my thoughts on how gender works in writing.  

The best writing is writing that comes from one's experience. You take in an event or lifestyle and you write about it and try your darnedest to write it well and vividly so that someone can pick up your writing and understand your experience, whatever large chunk or small grain of it you have put into the piece.

Some writers have the gift of writing any character, male or female.  They can put themselves in any pair of shoes and write brilliant stories.

Others, and I put myself in this category, are not so great at it.  But we try...and sometimes we succeed.  And those who write the sensitive, romantic Draco "emo!" Malfoy fanfics are plain dillusional.

I tried to read C & P (with a bit of S & S) for the Snape angst and wit, but reading Neil Gaiman has given me a better understanding of the English male perspective.  

But I still don't know if I can write the story...

Agh, I just need to go write it and see what happens.

End babble/review.

HUGE Book Review...and Writing Plans...

I have spent the past few weeks reading the following (in this order):

Wuthering Heights

Mrs. Dalloway

The Guy Not Taken

Good in Bed

Stardust

I finished the last three in two weeks...

Wuthering Heights:  When I first started reading this I thought instantly of Lily and Snape.  A dark young man and a beautiful young lady grow up together and have a strong connection to each other.  Then a really handsome and well to do guy moves into the neighborhood and the beautiful girl marries him.  Then she dies, leaving a child behind, then the guy dies, and the dark young man is left pinning for his love and treating the child badly.  So very much like Snape in the Harry Potter Series.

Except Heathcliff makes Severus Snape look well adjusted.  Heathcliff had some SERIOUS ISSUES.

A brief comparison:

Appearance:  I think Heathcliff is hotter.  Snape I imagine was kind of skinny and sallow.  Heathcliff had some meat on his bones and a bad boy scowl that would have appealed to some ladies.  I don't know what their noses or eyebrows looked like, but I wouldn't have gone for either one.

Vocabulary:  Here, Snape is definitely more civilized.  Heathcliff swears like a sailor.  They do share the ability to insult their true love's child-by-another-man (especially since the child looks like the father...just sayin').

Morals:  Heathcliff has no morals.  I am not surprised that those around him think he is beyond human.  He is violent, he digs up graves, and he is in no way hospitable.  He drives people to ruin and is vengeful. 

For quite sometime I thought of Snape as a very foul little man.  He constantly insults Harry (what did Harry ever do to him?) and generally belittles students (which I do take issue with).  However, the only time Snape was violent was when Harry fished around in Snape's memories and Snape threw a couple of spells at him.  Snape is some what dubious in his morals when he asks Voldemort to save Lily and not the rest of her family.  But, he makes up for it by doing his darnedest to protect the-boy-whose-very-presence-causes-him-to-simultaneously-remember-his-childhood-friend-and childhood-enemy.

I never thought I  would think well of Snape, but both Deathly Hallows and Wuthering Heights have forced me to conclude that he was really not THAT bad.  He was bitter, he was sneaky, and he had his own motivations that he never revealed to anyone (except Dumbledore and Harry) -- but he wasn't as bad as Heathcliff.

Which brings me to a couple of interesting thoughts.  First of all, the oldest cousin (the one who should have inherited the estate if Heathcliff hadn't gotten his father drunk and gambled it from him) looked like Catherine (H's true love -- more like true obsession) or at least HAD CATHERINE'S EYES!  Ahem!

Hello, Harry had Lily's eyes!  But Heathcliff, from what I could tell, was sort of nice to this boy and was trying to toughen him up much in the way Heathcliff was reared.  My question is:  why couldn't Snape be that nice to Harry?  I think it was the same reason Heathcliff couldn't be nice to Catherine's daughter: she looked too much like her father.  But, as some Harry Potter fans have wondered, would Snape have been nice to Lily's child if he or she had looked like Lily?  I think so -- it seemed that Heathcliff couldn't help it and he's totally off his rocker.   Snape, who is a smidgen more reasonable, would not have been immune either.

Overall, Wuthering Heights was AWFUL -- it made me so mad at times, and not the good mad where I start yelling at the book or throw it across the room.  But, I wanted half the people to attack Heathcliff with a shovel or an embroidery hoop depending on who they were -- I even imagined a scene where Nelly and Cathy attack Heathcliff by standing at the door with a poker and some upholstery. Sadly, this never happened. 

As I read on, it just got worse, and worse, and worse...and the ending was sort of lame.  If I had to like a Bronte novel, I guess it would be Jane Eyre because at least I could wrap my head around the character's motivations there.  I could not understand the people in Wuthering Heights.  The one part I did like was the crazy groundskeeper with the very thick accent and how it was written (a possible inspiration for a Hagrid?).

{A funny side note as I was editing this post -- from my profile you know I cannot spell.  So, I could not spell Heathcliff and was too lazy to look it up.  So I just typed whatever, like "Heithsliff" or "Heithclif" or, my favorite "Heithclifee".  Hee :D  Then I finally looked it up and spelled it properly.}

Mrs. Dalloway:  I bought a copy of the book on May 26th (or thereabouts) -- it took me about a MONTH to finish it and the book is only 3/4 of an inch thick.  I think it was more coherent than Faulkner, but just as difficult to follow.  I sometimes liked bouncing around into different character's heads, but sometimes it just made it difficult to keep track of who it was and I had to go back and re-read it.  

I liked it - kinda.  It was a hearty read and I didn't always understand what was happening.  I did like how Woolf captured post-war trauma in a person.  I think it very accurate how difficult it would be to come home after war.  The Iliad with its crazy metaphors sometimes alludes to this, but the chaos of the thoughts of someone traumatized by war -- it can get to you.  She did some wonderful writing there.  

And the Sally Seton stuff - woo!  Clarissa was quite the make-out mogul, was she not?!

The one question I have after all of this is:  is Elizabeth's, Clarissa's child, father Richard (Clarissa's husband) or Peter (other dude Clarrisa could have loved, or at least married)?  

The daughter is said to have a dark quality about her, dark, Oriental eyes.   Peter was said to be half-Indian and he and Clarissa spent some time in a wine cellar in their youth (this is what I understood).  And a nurse remarked that the Dalloway's are usually fair...I don't know what larger impact this question could have on the whole of the novel, but it is just a question I had.

The Guy Not Taken and Good in Bed:  These books are both by Jennifer Weiner, who writes intelligent chick lit.  Or at least this is what I tell myself.  But seriously, I think Weiner has a amazing style and ideas.  Her characters are captivating.  My hubby asked me if Good in Bed was all about sex (he looked worried) and I told him some of the plot.  After telling him about Cannie almost losing her baby and getting an emergency hysterectomy because her ex-boyfriend's crazy girlfriend shoved her, he said "So, did she sue them?" with that angry glint in his eye and curl of lip that I occasionally see when he is super mad.

He is such a Hufflepuff.  Seriously:  a strong sense of justice and a hard worker.  I am definitely a Ravenclaw (creative, a bit loopy -- think Luna Lovegood, and a fussy know-it all) with Hufflepuff leanings (I have a strong sense of justice too, but I am WAY too lazy).

So, Weiner's characters and plots can draw a reader in, but more over she has a way of articulating what it is that people feel when they love and especially when they divorce (her parents, like mine, divorced in her late teens).  Good in Bed hit hard on the abandonment issues (I know I was really hard on my father after his affair and the divorce, but he is WAY better and more loving than Cannie's dad), but The Guy Not Taken was even more of an exploration.  She said that writing was like her therapy.  I agree -- I write to soothe my mind and the many thoughts that churn therein.

Good in Bed was especially nice because she chose as her protagonist a woman who is intelligent but not confident about herself due to her perceptions of her appearance.

In other words, she thinks she is fat. 

All women, at some time or another, have cared far too much about their appearance. But unlike Bridget Jones, Cannie is tall and has lots of curves and some curves that shouldn't be there.  So it is justifiable to say that the protagonist is plus sized.

I always think I am fat - well, I didn't when I weighed 110 pounds which is where I should be.  However,  I should not be 103 or even 90 pounds which is where I was after a lot of fasting and working out.  And while diet and exercise did help, I actually had cancer at the time. That would make anyone lose weight and keep it off...the problem is you KEEP losing weight (which is when I got REALLY worried).

But, it is really easy for people to dismiss your concerns when you are five feet tall.  Yep, I have smaller bones and everything APPEARS small -- but when you wear a 32D and have cellulite, you certainly don't FEEL small.  I weighed myself at the gym the other day -- 122 pounds!!!  I have not been this heavy since junior year of college!  And even then I was 118!  I know my metabolism is slowing and gravity is setting in -- but I SERIOUSLY need to lose some weight (did I mention my mom was recently diagnosed with diabetes and I am scared out of my wits now...).

Still, I have not the issues of women who are taller who also are well endowed and have cellulite.  I am short and therefore can be cute.  They are taller and are labelled "fat chick" and other hurtful things.  Cannie must come to terms with her body type and who she is apart from her body.  And, moreover, find people who do not CARE what she looks like and love her.  

Stardust:  I saw the movie on an airplane or train -- it was fun.  The book was not too different except for the ending (the movie was much more Hollywood, obviously).

It was a very well written and very funny fairy tale.  I loved it.  I love books like these -- a little break from reality but still a sense of humanity in the characters and plot of the book.   

The only thing I did not like was the lack of development of Tristan and the Star's relationship, how they fell in love, etc.  I was not looking for that Hollywood glance/touch/inappropriate-sexual-liaison, but some more of them working together in their journey so that they develop a friendship that turns into love.  Tristan takes care of the star and the star just sits around -- girl didn't even help when he got turned into a door mouse.  But, other than that, I really enjoyed the novel.  I will have to look for other stuff by Neil Gaiman. 

Ahh...but now I feel compelled to write (and not just blog entries) and read some more.  I want to polish up a little story I have about Snape and Lily's friendship (it is pretty cute) and I also have this other story I want to get out about Snape in Death Eater mode.  But my mom is coming soon and I won't have a lot of time to write...

I sort of started Crime and Punishment (to get me in a Snape-writing mood) but I started re-reading Sense and Sensibility (because I think one should take all things in moderation).  I think I will keep switching between the two of them to get a criminal mind set paired with some English sentiment.  Maybe I should just read Montemorency - except it is for young adults and I have already read it.

*sigh*

I am off to cook.

Dumbledore gay?

Huh? Jo Rowling revealed in her Carnegie Hall reading the Dumbledore was in love with Grindewald (sp?). Very odd.

Many are saying that they no longer want to read the books due to Dumbledore's sexual leanings.

My question is - why?

So Dumbledore was homosexual - did we really see it in the books? Rita Skeeter hinted at in in her awful biography of Dumbledore noting the sinister relationship between Harry and Dumbledore. I always took that turn of phrase as meaning that Dumbledore viewed Harry as more than an engaging young man. But, then again, I don't hold Rita Skeeter in high regard.

Still - someone's sexual orientation is something private and in an age where one is never sure what another's preference is, it is possible to question.

But does it really matter? I think not. So, Dumbledore was gay - we don't see it in the novels, it doesn't change his character as a high ranking and well respected wizard. It does not affect his realtionship with the other characters.

I think it comes as a shock to others who see Dumbledore as a heroic leader and perhaps it is their own prejudice that leads them to believe a strong leader cannot be homosexual. It is that sterotype of the flamboyant and hysterical homosexual that somehow doesn't jive with who Dumbledore was.

It just goes to show that even though one might not think they are prejudiced, that some sterotypes may still exist in their subconscious.

Love everyone - that is what Dumbledore would have wanted AND Christ's message to us on earth.


MOVING on...One interesting question Jo Rowling was asked was the professions of the Maurader's and Lily. They were full time fighers - after school! Interesting!

It was also interesting to note that James supported everyone with his money.

I am just imagining one big house where everyone is living togehter, commune style. Lupin is working at table and Sirius cracking jokes with James while Lily is trying to charm food into something edible with Wormtail sitting at a bar looking on hungrily.

Hopefully it wasn't like that - I felt so sorry that Lily was the only girl in the group!

And it is rather sweet that James was so generous with his money.