New Year's Resolution

Yes, I know. It's the end of February and New Year's was several weeks ago. And a post about a New Year's resolution on a blog about books doesn't make much sense. Well, in a few minutes it will. Sometime between finishing The Fellowship of the Ring and starting The Two Towers, I made a decision. I decided that from now on, I will read at least one book by J.R.R. Tolkien a year. Notice I said "at least one". I think it's safe to say that I'm likely to read more than one since I adore him so much. But I'm going to make a conscious effort to read at least one of his works. And then today I thought, why not expand that resolution and include other authors?

What follows is a list of authors or time periods that I will read one book of each year. Realistically, this is a serious time commitment that I am making. I have 7 different categories that I've settled upon. That equals at least 7 different novels. And while that may not seem like a lot, these are novels I'm talking about, not children's books. Some of them will take longer to read because of how they are written or how long they are. So what could seem like a small number of novels can quickly stretch over a year.

One (1) J.R.R. Tolkien novel
This is anything from The Lord of the Rings to one of the books in the 12 volume History of Middle-earth series to his translation of Beowulf. There are many novels to choose from by Tolkien, whether they were published in his lifetime or have been published posthumously.

One (1) Robin McKinley novel
McKinley is possibly my favorite author after Tolkien. The Blue Sword is one of my favorite books and both Deerskin and Sunshine could arguably be added to that list. I already reread her books quite often so she clearly belongs on this list.

One (1) Agatha Christie novel
I'm not quite sure what it is about Christie, but I love her books. Sometimes you just need a good mystery and she has so many to choose from. Plus, I find Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple to both be very adorable.

One (1) William Shakespeare play
Yes, this category is technically plays and not novels. However, I am quite fond of a few of his plays and I do want to read the rest. Therefore, I'm putting him on this list regardless of what format he wrote in.

One (1) Jane Austen or Bronte novel
I made this a combined category because I love Austen and I love Charlotte Bronte. However, I haven't read all of Austen's novels nor have I read everything by the Bronte sisters. Did you know there were 3 Bronte sisters and they were all authors? Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre are both Bronte novels. As all four women wrote in a similar style and about similar subjects, I figured they could be in a category together.

One (1) Victorian novel
My favorite time period for literature is Victorian. It was when the novel really became popular and it includes several great authors. Some of the most popular authors include Charles Dickens, William Thackeray, George Eliot, Thomas Hardy, Bram Stoker, Arthur Conan Doyle, and Elizabeth Gaskell. They all have novels I've been meaning to read and just haven't had the time to.

One (1) 20th Century American novel
I prefer English literature over American as a general rule. However, there are several American authors who have novels that I want to read. So this is much more of a specific category than the Victorian one. The authors I intend to read in this category include John Steinbeck, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, and Harper Lee.

So there is my New Year's resolution, although it's really more of a life resolution. But I'm excited for it and it's one of the few resolutions that I will actually keep.

Look, I even have books for all 7 categories!

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

Today begins a series that I have been looking forward to for quite a while. I've considered doing it several times but it's a serious time commitment. But now the time has come and I'm quite excited. At the end of December my sister and I had a spontaneous Lord of the Rings movie marathon. As we were watching I began to wonder what exactly all the differences were between the movies and books. It had been a while since I'd last read the books and I decided it was time to read them again. Which brings me to this "series". What I'm doing is reading each book and then watching the equivalent movie. Then I will write a separate post about the book and the movie. This allows me to write about the things that make them different and what I love about each version. Altogether there will be 6 posts. It will take a while (it took me almost a month to read Fellowship because of work and school) but I'm very excited for this series and hope you will enjoy it as well.

To begin, I must admit that I took notes while reading. I went chapter by chapter and outlined the major plot points. I also underlined quotes I really like. I must also admit that I have not enjoyed reading a book so much since I last read The Silmarillion, which was for Senior Seminar and which I also took notes on. Clearly, I have an issue. I would also like to point out that The Lord of the Rings is considered one, singular novel, albeit a very long novel. It's one continuous story, which for the sake of length was split into three parts.

On the left is the original copy of Fellowship that I read, published in 1965. In the middle is my "crap" copy that I write in. On the right is my fancy, illustrated copy. And underneath are my notes.

The story begins with Bilbo's birthday party, although it is worth noting that Bilbo and Frodo share a birthday so it's always a joint party. Frodo is also aware that Bilbo is getting ready to leave the Shire, and that he has the Ring. What is most important to note is that 17 years pass between Bilbo's disappearance and Gandalf's return to verify that the Ring is indeed the One Ring. While the actual War of the Ring takes place in the span of a year, that journey does not occur for 17 years after the story begins. And even then the battles take place within a month. Putting dates to everything really changes how you see things. A couple other changes worth mentioning: Gandalf is actually the one who tells the story of Sauron's defeat. And at the same time he tells Frodo of Gollum's origins, a discussion that happens in Moria in the movies. Also, the song Pippin sings in the movie Return of the King comes from Chapter III.

And now we come to one of my favorite chapters: Chapter V A Conspiracy Unmasked. In this chapter Frodo learns that his friends know everything about the Ring and about his intention to leave the Shire. In this chapter they are the true definition of friendship. They vow to stick by him and do whatever they can to aid him. Even Fatty Bolger, who stays behind to pretend Frodo has not left. I love this chapter because it shows the first hints of how strong the bond is between these hobbits. 

Shortly thereafter we come to a character that most people do not like. Tom Bombadil is an odd character, who calls himself the oldest being and who can wear the Ring with no effect. He saves the hobbits from Old Man Willow, who had been trying to swallow Merry and Pippin. This scene happens in The Two Towers movie in Fangorn Forest. Tom also later saves the hobbits from the Barrow-wights and makes sure they get safely through the Old Forest and on their way to Bree. Once at the Prancing Pony, Frodo and Strider actually speak before everything goes wrong. Strider also asks to join their company and the hobbits let him after reading a letter from Gandalf that reveals Strider's true identity. On their journey, Strider tells them a part of my favorite tale, the story of Beren and Luthien, the man who loved an Elf Maiden. Here's a part of it.

"But she chose mortality, and to die from the world, so that she might follow him; and it is sung that they met again beyond the Sundering Seas, and after a brief time walking alive once more in the green woods, together they passed, long ago, beyond the confines of this world. So it is that Luthien Tinuviel alone of the Elf-kindred has died indeed and left the world, and they have lost her whom they most loved."

Another change is that of Arwen. She is not the one who guides the hobbits to Rivendell. It is actually Glorfindel who does that. And while Arwen is mentioned during the chapters in Rivendell, she never actually speaks and there are only very small hints of a relationship between her and Aragorn. Her part in the books is significantly smaller but I almost like it better. She has a quiet strength that I really appreciate. Peter Jackson made her a fighter in the movies and there's nothing wrong with that; I love Liv Tyler as Arwen. But what I love about her in the books is that she portrays the wives left at home while the men are at war. She is the waiting wife, the anxious mother, the hopeful child. More women are Arwen in a time of war than Eowyn, and I think that makes book Arwen more poignant. 

The Council of Elrond is actually a lot more involved in the book. The chapter is 31 pages long and always seems longer when I'm reading it. Many more people talk and you learn a lot more about the world of Middle Earth and what is happening in it. Gloin, Elrond, Boromir, Aragorn, Bilbo, Frodo, Gandalf, and Legolas all have a tale to tell.  During this discussion Aragorn basically claims his birthright, and for the rest of the story he is referred to by his true name. While in Rivendell the sword of Elendil is also reforged and renamed Anduril. Then there is much discussion by the Council of what to do with the Ring: give it to Tom Bombadil, send it over the Sea, throw it into the Sea, use it. During the Council, we also learn that Gandalf went to Edoras after escaping from Isengard. We are given our first glimpse into the character of Rohan and its horses.

"Not this at least," said Boromir, "that they will buy their lives with horses. They love their horses next to their kin. And not without reason, for the horses of the Riddermark come from the fields of the North, far from the Shadow, and their race, as that of their masters, is descended from the free days of old."

"True indeed!" said Gandalf. "And there is one among them that might have been foaled in the morning of the world. The horses of the Nine cannot vie with him; tireless, swift as the flowing wind. Shadowfax they called him. By day his coat glistens like silver; and by night it is like a shade, and he passes unseen. Light is his footfall! Never before had any man mounted him, but I took him and I tamed him, and so speedily he bore me that I reached the Shire when Frodo was on the Barrow-downs, though I set out from Rohan only when he set out from Hobbiton."

There are a couple quotes I really like that I'm going to share. They have no real significance and don't deal with anything different from the movies but they are worth sharing all the same. The first is from Gimli about the journey of the fellowship.

"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens."

Next is a quote from Haldir of Lothlorien.

"The world is indeed full of peril, and in it there are many dark places; but still there is much that is fair, and though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater."

And last is a quote that gives us a glimpse into Aragorn's feelings.

"Here is the heart of Elvendom on earth," he said, "and here my heart dwells ever, unless there be a light beyond the dark roads that we still must tread, you and I. Come with me!" And taking Frodo's hand in his, he left the hill of Cerin Amroth and came there never again as living man. 

The fellowship stays in Lothlorien for a month. Frodo and Sam both look into the Mirror of Galadriel, and Frodo learns that she has one of the three Elven rings. The company dines with Celeborn and Galadriel before they leave, and she gives them gifts. I love Aragorn's response to her question about what more she can give him.

And Aragorn answered: "Lady, you know all my desire, and long held in keeping the only treasure that I seek. Yet it is not yours to give me, even if you would; and only through darkness shall I come to it."

Galadriel does give him a brooch that belonged to her daughter and her granddaughter, Arwen. But the most significant gift is the one given to Gimli. When asked what a Dwarf could want from the Elves, he asks only for a hair from Galadriel. The relationship between Dwarves and Elves is long and complicated, and for ages they have been at odds. The Dwarves are rather greedy and believe their craftsmanship is above all others and that whatever they make belongs to them. But Gimli is so in awe of Galadriel, her beauty, and her kindness. And he's so unlike a Dwarf and so much more open-minded than most of his kin that Galadriel gives him three hairs. And he vows to treasure them always. 

The fellowship finally leaves Lothlorien and travel down Anduin by boat. They realize Gollum has been following them and are wary of any tricks. As they pass through the Argonath, Frodo finally realizes who Aragorn truly is. 

"Fear not!" said a strange voice behind him. Frodo turned and saw Strider, and yet not Strider; for the weatherworn Ranger was no longer there. In the stern sat Aragorn son of Arathorn, proud and erect, guiding the boat with skilful strokes; his hood was cast back, and his dark hair was blowing in the wind, a light was in his eyes: a king returning from exile to his own land.

"Fear not!" he said. "Long have I desired to look upon the likenesses of Isildur and Anarion, my sires of old. Under their shadow Elessar, the Elfstone son of Arathorn of the House of Valandil Isildur's son, heir of Elendil, has nought to dread!"

And now we come to the end. Frodo chooses to go to Mordor on his own, although Sam insists on following him. The book ends with them crossing the river to the other side. There is nothing of what happens to the other members of the fellowship. The beginning of The Two Towers covers that.

The Fellowship of the Ring has never been my favorite. I'm not sure if that's because it sets everything up or from the lack of Rohan, which is my favorite. But reading the book and taking notes has given me a new appreciation of it at least. I cannot help but love it, as I love the way Tolkien writes. His books are so rich and wonderful, and that's why I wanted to do this series. I wanted to introduce people to all the things not in the movies, all the things that make the story so much better.

Link to post on Fellowship movie: http://moviemagic92.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-lord-of-rings-fellowship-of-ring.html

10 books that have stayed with me

Apparently there is a challenge thing that was going around Facebook and Tumblr recently where you were supposed to list 10 books that have stayed with you or affected you in some way. I missed that memo, but I saw something about it the other day and it got me thinking. I have read so many books. I honestly have no idea how many and it would be pointless to try to guess because I wouldn't even know where to start. And I'm not just saying that because I was an English major in college. I'm saying it because it's the truth. I read voraciously. I read more than one book at a time, I read quickly, and I read constantly. So how do I pick from the hundreds of books that I have read and list 10 that have affected me more than the rest? Let's just say it wasn't easy.

In no particular order.

Harry Potter series
I am proud to say that I am a part of the Harry Potter generation. I literally grew up with this series and its characters. I was 15 when Deathly Hallows came out and the series ended. I was still a kid, a teenager, and the series had a major impact on me and how I view the world. I don't quite remember when I first started reading the series. It's like the books were always there. I do remember going to a midnight release of Order of the Phoenix. It was such a cool experience. And I spent the next day devouring the book. I ignored my family, built a nest, and hid there until I finished the book. For me, the series is more than just books. I view the characters as friends because I know them so well and for so long. And the series isn't about magic. It's about love, friendship, family, evil, hate, prejudice, and hope. It's about so much and is so beautiful. It's a series that can instantly reawaken the child within me, in the same manner that even the mention of visiting Disney does. I can't exactly put into words what the series means to me. Sometimes I feel that it is a part of me, something that has always been there and always will be.

The Lord of the Rings, including The Hobbit and The Silmarillion
I tend to refer to Tolkien's works collectively as LOTR, so when I say that know that I am referring to all his works dealing with Middle Earth. LOTR has done for me as an adult what Harry Potter did for me as a child. That is to say, it has became a major influence in my life. And not just because I insisted on doing my Senior Seminar presentation on Tolkien. I have 2 previous posts devoted to the impact that Tolkien has had on my life. I don't think I need to rehash everything. But I will say that Tolkien's works have become more important to me as I've grown older. When I was younger I was entranced by the way he wrote and by the story in general. Now, I'm in love with the world, the people, the history of what happens in the stories and the history of how the stories were created. The series has just become exponentially more important. I love LOTR for the things not seen in the movies. For the relationship between Eowyn and Faramir, and her strength. For the friendship and brotherhood between Faramir, Eomer and Aragorn. For the return to the Shire after the ring is destroyed. For Fatty Bolger. For the Noldor and their folly. For Beren and Luthien. For every little detail from beginning to end. And just like Harry Potter, LOTR is so deeply ingrained in me that I can feel it in my bones.

The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice
I know Shakespeare is a great author and his works are classic, blah blah blah, but I have never particularly loved any of his works. They force you to read a few in high school and they were okay but never really stuck with me. Then in college I had an entire class devoted to Shakespeare. And we read Othello. And that was that. I was in love. I've always liked Shakespeare's tragedies better, although Much Ado About Nothing has recently become a favorite in movie form at least, but none of his other tragedies had caught my attention as much as Othello did. I'm not sure if it's the interracial couple that I love so much (Othello is black and Desdemona is white) or if it's the fact that Iago in Aladdin was named after the villain in Othello. It's certainly not because of the extreme lack of communication throughout the play. It aggravates me that Othello and Desdemona are unable to communicate with each other in any way that could be effective. However without their stupidity the play would have no point so it serves a purpose. And they truly did love one another. Maybe that's why it spoke to me: the idea that two people could love each other so much and yet so quickly fall into mistrust, jealousy, rage, and murder.

Pride and Prejudice
Yes, it's rather cliche to have this novel on my list. But I truly love this book. I am a hopeless romantic at heart and this book feeds on that desire within me. The relationship between Elizabeth and Darcy is wonderful and quiet. It sneaks up on you until all of a sudden it's there and you wonder how you ever missed it. And I love that it always takes me a little bit to adjust to the language of the novel, and then for days after finishing it I think and speak in the same manner. I feel that I've been reading this book all my life and I still immensely enjoy it every time I begin reading it again.

The Blue Sword
I've come to love the works of Robin McKinley, and it's all because of this book. It's beautifully written and so incredibly real that I can't help but love it. It's one of the first books I read where the heroine has to stand on her own, not because she's destined to but simply because she's in the right place at the right time. And although the romance is very subtle, I still love the relationship between Harry and Corlath. This is one of those books that I could read once a month and never grow tired of. There are few books I can say that about but for this it's absolutely true. It's a book that I cannot get enough of no matter how many times I read it.

The Book Thief
I love this book because it's so different from other stories about World War II. It's about a child, it's about Germans, and it's narrated by Death. It's much funnier than it should be but also sad enough to break your heart. And for a book geared towards children, it has a very powerful message about a dark time in recent history. It deals with real-life issues and things that are hard to talk about but something that should not be forgotten. I won't get into the novel here because I've written about it before. So if you want to know more of my thoughts then go read my other post. But let's just say that it is a truly wonderful, beautiful book and well worth the read.

The Circle Trilogy: Black, Red, White
Officially it's a series now, not a trilogy, as there is a fourth book but for the purpose of this list I'm only referring to the first 3 novels. The Circle trilogy is, simply put, about Jesus and God's love for humanity. It's a retelling of the fall of Adam and Eve, of the chosen people, and of the sacrifice of Jesus. The story is set in our world but also in another world, which is where the retelling takes place. This series is beautiful. I can't say much more than that. It's a breathtaking story and will make you cry but it is just so magnificent. Sometimes I think we need a fresh perspective on Jesus and His sacrifice, and to be reminded again of what He did for us. That's what this series is for me. It's a reminder of who Jesus is and who we are to Him.

Jane Eyre
Sometimes I love this novel more than Pride & Prejudice. There's something about Jane Eyre that Pride & Prejudice doesn't have. And I certainly can't decide if I like Rochester or Darcy more. Both are equally lovely in my eyes. What I like about Jane Eyre is how quiet and unassuming Jane is yet at the same time how strong and fierce she is. Jane is quite willing to stand up for herself, even if it means losing someone she loves. She's determined to always do the right thing and not to give false hope to people. She's a strong woman but that doesn't mean she wants to remain single forever. Although she's described as being plain, I think she's beautiful in many ways. And the hopeless romantic in me love that she gets her happy ending after everything.

Life of Pi
What could be more interesting than a boy stuck on a lifeboat with an adult tiger? It's a terrifying thought but at the same time I can't stop thinking about how cuddly tigers look. Until they eat your face, that is. What I absolutely adore about this book is that it's categorized as a work of fiction but seems so incredibly real. I can imagine everything in the novel happening. It's very cleverly written in that respect. And it even addresses the question of reality at the end, when Pi tells the investigators a second, more believable story since they don't like the one with the animals. Life of Pi is a grand adventure on the high seas, full of wild animals, dangerous creatures, near death situations, and the hope that maybe things will end nicely.

Deerskin
I absolutely adore this book because it is everything a fairy tale should be. It's a retelling of a very dark fairy tale and it keeps that feeling. It's not a happy book, at least not in the Disney sense of fairy tales. But it's true to the way fairy tales were written, which is what appeals to me so much. It's also written by Robin McKinley, which is honestly part of the reason I like it so much. And I've already written about the book so if you want to know more then go read my previous post about it. But I will say that this has quickly become a favorite of mine and a book that I can read over and over again.

A Growing Love, Or Obsession

When I started college, I was a History major and English minor. I then switched to a double major in History and English, but I graduated with an English major and History minor. I had no concerns about English Senior Seminar when I started college because I wasn't an English major, and minors didn't have to do Senior Sem. By the time I was an English major, I was determined that no matter what I would do my Senior Sem presentation and paper on Tolkien. But before any of that even happened I was already writing papers on Tolkien.

Every English major and minor has to take Intro to English. This is where you get grammar and literary theory. Let me tell you, I hate literary theory. I just don't like it. One of the first things our professor made us do was write a paper on one of several topics so that she could get an understanding of our writing abilities at that point. One of the topics was Write About Your Favorite Author. Guess what topic I chose? And guess which author I picked? If you guessed Tolkien, you'd be right. I still have the paper and what follows is an excerpt. It's clearly not my best writing but I'm going to share some of it anyways so you can have something to compare my Senior Sem excerpt to.

"Each land has a voice of its own. The Shire is peaceful and naive. The realms of Rivendell and Lothlorien are the last havens of the Elves. Rohan is a hardworking country while Gondor is more warlike. The forests are ancient and angry, existing in a dreamlike state. And Mordor is bleak, possessed by and producing evil. The people and creatures are equally amazing. The different races each have their own personalities that clearly define them. The elves are majestic and peaceful, yet at times they can be ruthless. The orcs are pure evil, created by evil and living only to serve it. Men are proud and arrogant, but willing to try to redeem themselves. Dwarves are stubborn and competitive, always wanting to prove themselves. And hobbits are like children, innocent and pure."

Part of what bothered me about Tolkien's writings not being considered literary is that he's created this completely realistic world, full of real people and places. It's not something that he sat down one weekend and wrote. It was the product of many years of writing and study, and the end result is magnificent. How can you claim such a work does not have literary merit? 

It wasn't until after my freshman year of college that I tried reading The Hobbit again. And this time I finished it. I actually really like it. It's so easy to read that I can't fathom what my problem was when I tried to read it the first time. I've even read it a couple times since then, mainly to prepare myself before the movies came out. 

My next couple years of college passed with no real thought about Senior Sem and what I would focus my presentation on. It's an unstated rule that all English majors attend a Senior Sem presentation before they start Senior Sem. This way they have some idea what they're getting into beforehand. I had attended a couple my freshman year. The first presentation I saw was on Harry Potter. A couple people that year focused their presentations on Harry Potter and after that the series was banned from being used in Senior Sem. It's another series that I love and think has literary merit but because it's popular and written for "children", it's considered unworthy. 

The summer before my senior year, I started doing research on Tolkien and his works. I needed something that I could use to justify doing my presentation on Tolkien. That is when I discovered mythopoeia and my topic was born. Since we had to have more than one work, and at least one had to be from an upper-level class, the other works I picked were Odyssey by Homer and The Four Zoas by William Blake. I used Homer as a basis for what canon mythology was and Blake as an example of created mythology that is considered worthwhile. I needed to establish what mythology was before I could prove that Tolkien's works should be considered mythopoeic (created mythology). To further my point, I focused on The Silmarillion. First, it's a single book and therefore shorter than The Lord of the Rings. Second, it's an outline of how Middle Earth was created and where the people came from. It's one very long creation story, one of the oldest kinds of mythology. During my research on The Silmarillion I stumbled upon something very exciting: there were bands who had written songs/albums based off the book. In particular, Blind Guardian has an album called Nightfall in Middle-Earth that I bought and listened to throughout my semester of Senior Sem. I still listen to it frequently. It's wonderful and I recommend it if you don't mind power metal. 

Finding music based off The Silmarillion was easy. Finding articles on the novel, The Four Zoas, or mythopoeia was not so easy. It was really difficult to find anything on those 3 topics. Homer is popular so articles about him and his writings are abundant. Even finding articles on LOTR was easy but as I wasn't using it for my presentation those articles were pointless. Eventually though I found enough articles for all of my sources. Some of them I actually really enjoyed and still have copies of. And I found an article with one of the most interesting titles ever: "An Imitation of Oysters: C.S. Lewis and the Myth in Mythopoeia". Once I had all of my articles I was ready to start writing my paper and creating my presentation. End result: 20 page paper and 30 minute presentation. What follows is two excerpts from my final paper. The first deals with the concept of the fall in mythology and one of the places where it is found in The Silmarillion. The second deals with a couple cases were Tolkien was influenced by outside sources.

"The fall of the Elves is limited to a line of Elves, specifically the Noldor.  They are the ones who create the Silmarils and then vow to reclaim them at any cost.  The Silmarils increased the “Noldor’s pride, but also their sorrow, a Fall that took them into destruction, and with them all those that became involved in one way or another with the Silmarils” (Schweicher 168).  The Silmarils are the bane of the Noldor and almost destroy them, their allies, and all of Middle-earth.  Their fall is by far the most destructive and the farthest reaching."

"The character of Túrin Turambar mirrors the character Kullervo from the Finnish epic The Kalevala.  In his book Tolkien and the Silmarils, Randel Helms describes the relationship between the two men.  Both grow up in the home of a noble relative and both unknowingly sleep with their estranged sister.  When the two discover that they are siblings the sister throws herself over a cliff and the brother falls on his sword.  The story of Túrin also shows aspects of fate and doom, traits common to Germanic literature.  Not only does Túrin’s name “Turambar” means “master of doom” but he is frequently guided by his fate.  He slays his friend Beleg in what seems like an accident but was really the workings of fate.  Fate is also prevalent in the story of Beren and Luthien.  Thingol, Luthien’s father, tells Beren that he may marry Luthien on the condition “that Beren wrench a Silmaril out of the crown of Morgoth and bring it back” (Whitt).  Thingol’s desire for a Silmaril dooms himself and all his people, and involves them in the Doom of Mandos that is upon the Noldor for their kinslaying."

Although I loved spending four months studying Tolkien and his works, I was happy when the semester was finally over. Senior Sem is very stressful and I was so ready for it to be over by the end. It was wonderful to do a presentation on Tolkien and show people that his works are more than what they seem and that they are worth more than people think. And I've certainly gained something from the experience. I have discovered two different societies based on Tolkien and mythopoeia, both which I fully intend to join. I've discovered a CD that combines my love of Tolkien with my love of music. I've discovered the art of Ted Nasmith, who illustrated The Silmarillion, and I found a copy of the book with his art which I was forced to buy. And I've become even more of a fount of useless knowledge when it comes to Tolkien, but I enjoy it so it's ok.

Entranced by Tolkien

I cannot remember a time when I did not love to read. Most people can pick out a book that changed their outlook on reading; they can say "This book made me love reading". I can't say that. I'm absolutely certain that I was born with an innate love of reading. It's part of my DNA. It's just who I am. But, there is still a series that majorly influenced the way I look at literature and  reading.

I was 9 years old when The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring was released in theaters. I can remember going to see the movie and my mom covering my eyes when Galadriel almost takes the ring from Frodo. I'm not sure why she thought that would scare me when I had been watching Star Wars and Jurassic Park since I was 3. But I digress. Somewhere around this time is when I also began reading the books. Since I was still a little young, my parents thought I should start with The Hobbit, that it would be easier for me to read than The Lord of the Rings. It was a nice theory but it didn't work so well. I got bored about the time the dwarves started singing as they washed the dishes. So I stopped reading The Hobbit and instead spent at least the next year struggling through The Lord of the Rings. What 9 year old thinks The Hobbit is hard to read but The Lord of the Rings is easy? Clearly, I have issues.

Part of the reason I struggled with LOTR at first is because Tolkien uses a lot of detail. A lot. At the time, I had a difficult time reading just detail and only a little bit of dialogue. But I persevered and finished the series. And it became my favorite. Well, along with Harry Potter, as I devoured that series as the books came out. I probably read LOTR a couple more times between then and my senior year of high school. During high school I also read The Silmarillion and started The Unfinished Tales, which ironically enough I'm not sure I ever finished.

The big eye-opening moment came when I was a senior in high school. I was taking AP Literature and one of our projects/presentations required us to chose a book and do a report on it. Basic high school assignment. I believe we were given a list of books and told to pick one of those, or check with our teacher if we had another book in mind. When I heard about the project I immediately knew that I wanted to do it on LOTR. I approached my teacher and asked her if I could. I'll never forget her response. Basically, she said "No, because it's escapist literature". Welcome to the literary canon, where scholars you don't know decide what books are worthy of being taught. I had a whole argument planned to convince her to let me do LOTR but I was so shocked by her answer that I conceded.

"Escapist literature": basically, books that you read to escape from real life or read for fun. So anything that isn't escapist literature is boring and forced upon us? One problem: I enjoyed all except maybe 3 books that we had to read in high school. I read Pride & Prejudice, Jane Eyre, and Wuthering Heights way before anyone was ever required to read them. I read those books because I wanted to, because I enjoyed them. Does that make them escapist literature? Does that mean they shouldn't be a part of the literary canon? These are the issues I have with the literary canon. I don't agree with how it is decided that a book is worthy of joining the canon. I understand that during this time Harry Potter was huge and people still saw it mostly as young adult or children's fiction. But there is so much in those books that is more than what it seems. And LOTR is the same way, if not more so. Just because a book is popular and is made into a movie does not mean that it's unworthy of being considered canon literature.

And thus was my soapbox born. This is the issue that would bother me through my last year of high school and through my years as an English major in college. I was determined, however, to change the popular opinion somehow. And I like to think I did, at least a little.

Gone Girl

MAJOR SPOILERS!!!!! Seriously, do not keep reading if you have any intention of someday soon reading Gone Girl or seeing the movie. If spoilers don't bother you then feel free to read on. Let me start by saying that Gillian Flynn is a great writer. I'm 99% sure that Gone Girl is the first book I've read where I do not like a single character in the novel. Not one. All the characters suck and are terrible people. That being said, it was a seriously incredible, mind-boggling book. It is definitely worth reading, no matter how terrible the characters act.

The scene. It's Nick and Amy's five year wedding anniversary. Nick comes home from work (he owns a bar with his twin sister) to find Amy gone. There are signs of a struggle in the living room and there is a present in their closet for Nick from Amy. The police naturally somewhat suspect Nick, although he keeps denying that he killed his wife. It was tradition for Amy to create a treasure hunt for Nick on their anniversary, and the present is the first step. He follows the clues, hoping for some hint about what happened to Amy.

I knew going into the novel that it was one of two things: either Nick really did kill Amy, or she faked her death for some reason. The answer: she faked her death. The reason: she's bloody crazy. Ok, that's not the only reason but she is absolutely crazy. Everyone is whack. Amy discovered over a year before the novel begins that Nick was having an affair with a former student of his (he's a college professor). Amy is naturally upset by this discovery but instead of confronting her husband, she decides she's going to ruin his life. She starts meticulously planning every little detail, intent on framing Nick for her "murder".

Let me back up a little. Amy's parents are psychologists, as is Amy. Her parents wrote a series of highly successful children's books called Amazing Amy, based off their daughter but a more perfect version. Amy is very detail-oriented and creates elaborate plans. She made it look like a friend tried to kill her because she wanted to replace Amy, all because her friend was better than her at some things. She made it look like a boyfriend raped her when she discovered he was cheating on her. Amy would physically injure herself to implicate others. The cases against her boyfriend and friend were solid and there was no question that Amy was telling the truth, except she wasn't.

And now this woman has discovered her husband is having an affair. Nick talks to Amy's former boyfriend and friend for insight into Amy's past, and her friend sums it up perfectly.

"Friends see most of each other's flaws. Spouses see every awful last bit. If she punished a friend of a few months by throwing herself down a flight of stairs, what would she do to a man who was dumb enough to marry her?"

What she does is write a fake diary, pretending that she fears her husband may kill her. She leaves clues that throw Nick's innocence into question. She thinks of every minute detail and has a plan to cover it. This is a new level of crazy. And when Amy accepts help from her high school boyfriend who is obsessed with her and kidnaps her, she kills him. She literally gets away with murder, although not the murder she intended.

Nick is not much better. Amy's clues seem sweet on the surface and Nick finds himself falling for them, and by extension, for Amy. Their relationship is very twisted. They were not honest with each other when they first met and when they showed their true selves, they didn't like each other. Their marriage was more or less based on lies. Once Nick realizes that Amy is actually still alive and trying to frame him for her murder, he starts pleading with her through interviews, begging her to come home. He wants to show everyone who she truly is and have her arrested for what she's done. But when she comes home, she spins a convincing story of kidnapping, rape, and murder done in self-defense. There is no way to prove that Nick's theory is true, or that Amy's story is false. Once again, she has thought of everything.

How does the story end? Nick can't prove anything, no matter how hard he tries. And eventually he has to give up because Amy has found a way to keep him around: she gets pregnant. They will always second guess each other and never fully trust the other, but they stay together. Their marriage is completely toxic and will probably destroy them both and their child.

You can see why I don't like any of the characters. Nick and Amy are both seriously messed up. They constantly present a facade to the world and each other. Amy is willing to go so far as actually killing herself to help prove that Nick is a murderer and receive the death sentence. She throws herself down stairs, poisons herself, cuts herself. She does a whole slew of insane things throughout her life to prove that others have hurt her. Nick is terrified of becoming his father, a man who hates women. He is also a mama's boy and very close with his twin sister. Once Amy disappears, he starts having vivid daydreams of her bleeding, struggling, and begging for help. He envisions killing her when he realizes Amy is framing him. He actually tries to once she comes back, before realizing that Amy was right: they are perfect for each other and could not survive married to anyone else. Nick is also very standoffish. He doesn't always act the way a grieving husband is expected to, and he is frequently described as having a "killer" smile. Not exactly helpful in convincing people he's innocent.

You may be wondering how someone could even like a novel with such despicable characters. Well, the story's very well written. It's hard to put down; once you start it you don't want to stop. There are several twists and turns that keep you guessing. It's actually a really good book and fun to read, as you try to figure out what really happened. I'm very excited to see the movie, which comes out October 3. I'm interested to see how Rosamund Pike plays Amy and I think Ben Affleck will be good as Nick. I would definitely recommend reading the book before seeing the movie. Either way, I hope you have as much fun figuring everything out and being completely frustrated with the characters as I did.              

The Storyteller

I started college as a History major and English minor, switched to a double major, and graduated as an English major and History minor. I love reading (clearly, hence the blog) and I love history. What I discovered though is that I don't like political or economic or even really military history (although learning about wars was always one of my favorite things). No, the history I really love to learn about is people; how they lived, how they acted, how their life was different than mine is today. "History isn't about dates and places and wars. It's about the people who fill the spaces between them." (Pg 373) And in school, even college, you don't get a lot of that kind of history. So instead I turned to books, not only for my own enjoyment but also to learn. I read quite a bit of historical fiction and it's allowed me to learn about different times and people without having to also learn about politics and economics. And yes, it's fiction and not everything is 100% true but a good author does their research and I have learned things from books that we were taught in class. I did a review of The Book Thief, which deals with WWII but from the point of a young German girl. It was different from your average book about that time and absolutely incredible. I just finished another book about the Holocaust, although this one is set in modern times. Jodi Picoult's The Storyteller is about a man in his 90s who was an SS officer and wants a friend of his to kill him. It's powerful, graphic, and surprising. And it's beautiful.

SPOILERS!
Little bit of plot. Sage is a baker in her early 20s who has a scar on her face and is having an affair with a married man. Josef confesses to her that he was an SS officer named Reiner Hartmann and asks her to forgive and then kill him, since she is Jewish by birth though not by practice. Leo works for the office of Human Rights and Special Prosecutions and he is trying to help Sage prove that Josef is who he says he is. Minka is Sage's grandmother who is a Holocaust survivor and was at Auschwitz. And interspersed through their POVs is a story about a young girl who falls in love with a vampire who killed her father.

The book is split into three parts. Part I is Sage learning about Josef's past and getting in contact with Leo. Part II is Minka's account of her experience during the war. Part III is how everything ends. The whole book deals with the issue of good and evil, right and wrong, black and white. Can Sage kill Josef if he asks her to? What will that do to her? How can she live with that? Is it enough knowing that he killed or participated in the death of thousands of Jews? There's no answer. You can't answer questions like those. The whole situation is too personal, too fresh, too fragile. The questions asked in the book are the same ones that historians and people have been asking since the Holocaust happened. And Picoult's answers are interesting.

"Did I know this brutality was wrong? Even that first time, when my brother was the victim? I have asked myself a thousand times, and the answer is always the same: of course. That day was the hardest, because i could have said no. Every time after that, it became easier, because if I didn't do it again, I would be reminded of that first time I did not say no. Repeat the same action over and over again, and eventually it will feel right. Eventually, there isn't any guilt." (Pg 120 Josef)

"I did not think about what I was doing. How could I? To be stripped naked, shouted at to move faster and faster toward the pit with your children running beside you. To look down and see your friends and your relatives, dying an instant before you. To take your place between the twitching limbs of the wounded, and wait for your moment. To feel the blast of the bullet, and then the heaviness of a stranger falling on top of you. To think like this was to think that we were killing other humans, and to us, they could not be humans. Because then what did that say about us?" (Pg 156 Josef)

"Inside each of us is a monster; inside each of us is a saint. The real question is which one we nurture the most, which one will smite the other." (Pg 111 Josef)

Sage hears both Josef's side and Minka's. She hears from the predator and the prey, the victim and the attacker. It makes things hard for her, to reconcile this old man who everyone in the community loves with a cold-blooded killer who murdered innocent people. Especially since Josef and Minka crossed paths in Auschwitz. Minka worked as a secretary for Josef's brother, who was also an SS officer. Franz was not as brutal and violent as Josef, although he could be if the occasion called for it. Minka started working for him after the story she was writing was discovered. Her story is the one interspersed throughout the book. Although it deals with supernatural creatures, it's a clear allusion to the situation between the Germans and Jews, and the undeserved prejudice for something that is not the fault of the Jews. Minka's story kept her alive for a time, the way Scheherazade used her storytelling to stay alive. In the end, Franz is not able to hear the rest of her story and neither is Sage as Minka left it unfinished, leaving the ending up to the reader.

When Picoult explained Minka's reasoning in leaving her story unfinished I was afraid that meant the book would not have a solid ending. But it does. Sage manages to get proof that Josef was who he said he was and Leo is going to arrest him. But Sage goes through with killing Josef. She doesn't forgive him but she wants to keep the promise she made, even if it means she has to kill someone. That's not the end though. When Josef was an SS solider he had had his blood type tattooed to his arm in case he ever needed blood. He removed the tattoo but his SS records still listed his blood type. When Josef tries to kill himself because he believes Sage won't kill him, he receives a wristband at the hospital with his blood type. And when Sage and Leo arrive at Josef's house to arrest him after Sage has killed him, she sees the wristband and realizes that Josef was not Reiner Hartmann. He was Franz Hartmann, the scholarly brother who was so enthralled by Minka's story and not as terrible as his brother, but who in the end watched his brother die and did nothing to save him.

I don't remember when it was, but there was a moment when I thought that maybe Josef was Franz and not Reiner. I dismissed the thought but it turns out I was right. I wasn't exactly expecting it. It certainly explains how Josef was able to pass himself off as Reiner so successfully; as Reiner's brother he would have known about the things Reiner had done. But still, poor Sage. You can't exactly say she killed an innocent man, but she didn't kill the man she expected. And even after all those years, Franz still had the original copy of Minka's story and was still trying to figure out the ending.

I loved it. Even with the plot twist and the dark subject matter. Yes, there were lighthearted moments. Leo mentions that people know when someone was a Nazi because "he's got a European accent and wears a long leather coat and has a German shepherd." But Picoult was also not sparse on the account of Auschwitz and the treatment of the Jews. The novel is graphic, it's dark, and it can be hard to read. It's so hard to imagine that these things really happened, that humans treated other humans like that. But it's also captivating and beautifully written. You want to know what happens next, both to Minka and Sage. You know Minka survives, but how? And you hope that Sage realizes she's worth more than being the other woman, which she finds through Leo. And while there is still no answer to the difficult questions presented in the book, Picoult manages to give different interpretations that leave you thinking long after the book is finished.