The Twelve Books of Christmas: Day 1

It's the final countdown to Christmas, so to keep the blog in the Christmas spirit, I thought I'd number my 12 all-time favourite books to give (or receive) as gifts.

Day 1
Pride & Prejudice

Some people don't like Austen, and I get it, in a way - I do. It takes me a couple of hours slugging through her books for me to get used to the old fashioned writing style, before I can get really going and just enjoy the story.

So believe me, I can understand why some people might find sticking through the tough parts a little boring.

But at the end of the day, I just love the socially inept Darcy and the feisty Elizabeth way too much not to judge someone if they say they don't like Pride & Prejudice.

And if you're buying it as a gift for a person who doesn't like reading, the 2005 movie with Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFayden owns a very special place in my heart; likewise, the BBC adaptation (the one with the famous Colin Firth wet shirt scene) is equally as good, so there's loads of options to go with!

Confessions of a Book Worm #2

The problem with "that's misogynistic" in relation to books. Oh yeah. I'm going there.
See, I read somewhere quite some time ago that it was funny how, in the Victorian Era, when Jane Austen was writing, the girls in the books were portrayed as strong, independent women who knew what they wanted, and didn't let any man tell them what to do. Yes, they fell in love and married, but they didn't marry simply because it was what society expected them to do. And while it might be argued that really, Austen, the Bronte sisters and other women writers of the time were simply trying to out across the message that marriage wasn't all bad, we do have to recognise that very few women actually behaved like that at the time.
Even more ridiculous, this person thought, was the fact that, today, when women have, supposedly, gained equality to men (don't get me started on that supposedly. I could go on for days), the heroines in the books are Bella Swans, and Anna Steeles, who are only happy to let the man dictate their every move - the latter in a more... ahem, extreme way. This person believed that such books were a step back in the feminism fight, and were a disgrace to the world.
And this is where the problem lies. I'll be honest: I read Fifty Shades of Grey, Fifty Shades Darker and Fifty Shades Freed. Even more honestly: I liked them. The epitome of honesty: I would never, ever consent to a relationship like that. It's not for me. However, my main problem with Fifty critics is that they seem to be making a stink of the fact that the book is a Twilight fanfic, and must, therefore, be crap by default (since we're sharing, I'll admit to having been a Twilight fan. When I was 12. We grow up. When you're twelve, a perfect boy sounds... well, perfect. Today, if I met Edward, I'd likely kill him within the hour). Then they go on to call it "porn". I'm not very clear on what counts as porn in book terms. I only ever thought of porn in terms of movies before, so who the hell knows. Maybe it is. And guys buy those movies by the droves, don't deny it. So what's the problem about Fifty being porn, if that's what you want to call it? It might be because it became famous, and porn is usually considered something that should be kept hush-hush. But the main reason, as far as I can see, is that women are reading porn. God forbid! Women might be masturbating while reading Fifty Shades of Grey! The horror!
Yeah. Because, as a person who read all 3 books, I can safely say there are hot moments, even for a non-BDSM inclined person like myself. The thing is, there is also a solid character development, and interesting, if predictable, plot line. It's not just sex sex and more sex. So the comments about how Fifty is anti-feminist? Well. What exactly do people see in the book that is misogynistic? The fact that the man is the dom, and the woman is the sub? Just because a book about a dom woman and a sub man hasn't been written (or maybe it has - it's just not famous), doesn't mean it doesn't happen just as much as the situation presented in Fifty. In fact, if people had taken the time to read Fifty, they would know that in fact, there is such a relationship mentioned in the books. It's not in the forefront, but it is mentioned and acknowledged.
But if you hate Fifty on principle, let's look at other literary pieces. Richelle Mead's Dark Swan series have a really strong, independent and kick-ass heroine, Eugenie Markham. She kills the shit that gives you nightmares. She is badass. Feminist, right? Well. What if I told you she was in to bondage with her boyfriend? Does that instantly make her anti-feminist? NO. It makes her a well-rounded character, who likes things kinky in the boudoir. Nothing wrong with that. And there is no way in hell Mead can be called a misogynist.

Another example, and one which makes me even more incensed than the Fifty debacle: Harry Potter. I have seen and heard countless people say "it's misogynist, because the women are always secondary characters". Let me just point out that the series might be called 'Harry Potter', and Potter might be the Chosen One, but he would have died at the age of eleven without ever even knowing that it was Quirrell if not for Hermione. Ginny Weasley is the most powerful wizard in the entire Weasley family. Minerva McGonagall almost single-handedly decides to stand up against Voldemort in Deathly Hallows, and gives instructions to all other teachers about what to do. Molly Weasley kills Bellatrix. And Bellatrix herself probably kills more people than even Voldemort does. Personally, I'd be more scared if I met Bellatrix in a dark alley than I would be if I met Voldemort. Luna Lovegood is eccentric, but uncannily clever. Umbridge nearly destroys Hogwarts. I could go on. On the flip side, Ron is clumsy, Harry is dependent on Hermione, Fudge was too scared to face Dumbledore, so he sent Umbridge, who wasn't scared. The one thing the Weasleys wanted more than anything was a girl daughter.
So why, exactly, is it so easy for us to just turn and say "it's misogynist"? If you want a real example of misogyny, you should read Euripirdes' Medea. Misogyny is telling women they can't read a book because they might get aroused reading it. Misogyny isn't writing a book whose main character is a guy; it's treating the female characters as if they were not important simply because they're female. Misogyny is making women believe that wanting what they want and liking what they like - be it bondage, BDSM, vanilla, or becoming a nun - is wrong because they have to conform to men's expectations because they are the "fragile sex". Misogyny is demeaning women because they don't have a penis.
Misogyny does still happen, yes, but not half as much, at least in literature, as most people would have us believe.

WebRep

currentVote

noRating

noWeight

Resenha Northanger Abbey

Ok, ok... eu admito: foi o primeiro livro da Jane Austen que eu li. Naõ precisa nem dizer que vergonha isso é.
Vamos combinar, já tava mais do que na hora, né? Jane Austen é um clássico, afinal de contas. Quando minha tia descobriu que ainda não tinha lido nenhum livro da Jane, ela pirou e tratou de me dar o livro mais rápido do que achei que fosse possível.

E foi assim que acabei lendo Northanger Abbey. Não é um dos trabalhos mais bem conhecidos dela, como Pride and Prejudice, mas eu gostei.

Ambientado no século XIX, o livro que não deve ter mais que umas 270 páginas, me demorou mais que o normal para terminar, simplesmente porque toda a pontuação e escrita de edição que eu tenho, foi mantida idêntica à da primeira edição, o que significa aquele inglês cheio de palavras que nem gente que mora na Inglaterra usa mais, então eu vivia tendo que reler uma frase, ou procurar uma palavra no dicionário.

A jovem de dezessete anos, Catherine Manford, tem muitos irmãos, e mora em uma pequena comunidade rural com toda a sua família.
Quando dois amigos da família lhe convidam para passar um tempo na cidade de Bath, Catherine não hesita em concordar, doida que está para sair de Fullerton, e ver o mundo; ver se tudo é realmente igual ao que ela havia lido nos romances de terror, onde vilões espreitam a cada esquina, assassinatos horripilantes são a norma, e a heroína é muitas vezes posta em situações de risco de vida.
Chegando em Bath, ela descobre que a realidade é bem diferente.
Sem amigos, a não ser o senhor e a senhora Allen, ela acaba conhecendo um jovem após uma semana, por meio do padre, e dança com ele, descobrindo que se chama Henry Tilney, e que tem uma irmã. Encantada com seus modos, ela vive à espera de vê-lo novamente, mas ao passar de uma semana sem vê-lo, ela se desanima.
Justo então, uma velha amiga de escola da senhora Allen chega na cidade, e sua filha mais velha, Isabella, que é apens quatro anos mais velha que Catherine, acaba virndo muito amiga de Catherine.
Isabella se apaixona pelo irmão de Catherine, James, mas acaba por quebrar seu coração no final, fazendo com que o noivado deles que havia se formado, se acabasse, e o irmão de Isabella, John, é apaixonado por Catherine, mas Catherine só tem cabeça para o jovem senhor Tilney, que havia aparecido novamente, desta vez com sua irmão, Eleanor, e Catherine logo se vê deslumbrada pelos dois.
Após algum tempo, os Tilney voltam para sua casa, Northanger Abbey, e convidam Catherine para ir com eles. Com o consentimento, por carta, de seus pais, Catherine vai para Northanger, onde seu espírito aventureiro, vê na grande casa de estilo gótico, um prato cheio para sua imaginação correr solta...


O livro tem um final fofo... talvez previsível, mas sem problemas.
E devo dizer que, embora na maior parte do tempo, a atitude amuada e de aceitação da Catherine tenha me irritado, especialmente em algumas cenas com John, ela realmente subiu no meu conceito uma hora, e se ela não tivesse feito o que fez, não sei se tinha chegado no final do livro xD