11 posts tagged “borrowed”
Our third and final audiobook was the one we both agreed on. Not too much to say about this one. If you are familiar with the show it's what you would expect.
A lot of fun. This is probably better as an audiobook than reading it to yourself.
One funny line:
"Childrearing is arguably the most important of my core values. I believe in it, I practice it, and I ceaselessly promote it to my friends and followers. That said, generally speaking, I’m against children."
Who would have ever guessed that a parody of conservative talk show hosts could be so funny so long?
A lot of fun. This is probably better as an audiobook than reading it to yourself.
One funny line:
"Childrearing is arguably the most important of my core values. I believe in it, I practice it, and I ceaselessly promote it to my friends and followers. That said, generally speaking, I’m against children."
Who would have ever guessed that a parody of conservative talk show hosts could be so funny so long?
On our road trip, I had the second audio book choice and I chose On Chesil Beach. While this was incredibly sad, it was also very beautiful.
McEwan is able to write about situational conflicts in such a harrowing, haunting way.
The story is of two virgins on their wedding night and set in the early 1960s.
The scenes in their honeymoon suite are amazing. When I read Murakami's sex scenes I am often struck by how he has no sensibility for sex and femininity. Those scenes were a stark contrast here as McEwan was able to capture so vividly and poignantly what the experience could be like for a woman who has experienced abuse in her past.
I have only read two of Murakami's books, so it might be a false impression, but I feel that, sexually, women are objects in Murakami's stories. McEwan left me amazed that a man could have such insight into a female experience.
Also, music plays an important role in this book. And I found myself thinking of both High Fidelity and Once. Although this one has the saddest ending, I think I prefer it to the other two.
McEwan is able to write about situational conflicts in such a harrowing, haunting way.
The story is of two virgins on their wedding night and set in the early 1960s.
The scenes in their honeymoon suite are amazing. When I read Murakami's sex scenes I am often struck by how he has no sensibility for sex and femininity. Those scenes were a stark contrast here as McEwan was able to capture so vividly and poignantly what the experience could be like for a woman who has experienced abuse in her past.
I have only read two of Murakami's books, so it might be a false impression, but I feel that, sexually, women are objects in Murakami's stories. McEwan left me amazed that a man could have such insight into a female experience.
Also, music plays an important role in this book. And I found myself thinking of both High Fidelity and Once. Although this one has the saddest ending, I think I prefer it to the other two.
We started a road trip and decided to take some audio books with us. The problem is that our reading tastes do not overlap. This one was my husband's choice.
At first I detested this book. I wondered how I would make it through the whole twelve hours. But eventually I realized that the narrative is both insane and very original.
The book is about human genes. And how they are becoming co-opted in strange ways by scientists and pharmaceutical companies.
The narrative is told without a main character. All the characters (and there are tons of them!) are given equal time. Some stories go somewhere, some don't. Some get picked up further down the line, others run into each other. Yes, it's a confusing as you would imagine, but it's also ingenious. It is the concept of genes as closely as could be represented in a textual format.
Didn't love it, but definitely can say I appreciated it.
(I would love to meet a parrot like Gerrard as well.)
At first I detested this book. I wondered how I would make it through the whole twelve hours. But eventually I realized that the narrative is both insane and very original.
The book is about human genes. And how they are becoming co-opted in strange ways by scientists and pharmaceutical companies.
The narrative is told without a main character. All the characters (and there are tons of them!) are given equal time. Some stories go somewhere, some don't. Some get picked up further down the line, others run into each other. Yes, it's a confusing as you would imagine, but it's also ingenious. It is the concept of genes as closely as could be represented in a textual format.
Didn't love it, but definitely can say I appreciated it.
(I would love to meet a parrot like Gerrard as well.)
I would never have picked this one up on my own. My book club chose it. After my initial resistance, I became absorbed in the story. If you have an appreciation for Gothic literature, you'll probably really enjoy this one.
The characters, while somewhat two-dimensional, are still fascinating in their personalities that range from well-meaning (but clueless) to all out psychotic.
One of the best aspects of the book is in how direct dialogue from two of the characters is limited. It lends an extra eerie quality to the story.
I would also recommend this book because it's one of the least predictable stories I've read in quite a while. I did figure out the "twist" shortly before it was revealed, and some in the book club felt it was contrived, but it's creative, so I can look past how unlikely it was.
The characters, while somewhat two-dimensional, are still fascinating in their personalities that range from well-meaning (but clueless) to all out psychotic.
One of the best aspects of the book is in how direct dialogue from two of the characters is limited. It lends an extra eerie quality to the story.
I would also recommend this book because it's one of the least predictable stories I've read in quite a while. I did figure out the "twist" shortly before it was revealed, and some in the book club felt it was contrived, but it's creative, so I can look past how unlikely it was.
What I learned from this sad to disturbing collection of Christmas tales is that Sedaris has major psychological issues with Christmas.
Six in all, the pieces are a mix of essays and short stories. The short stories include baby murder and intentional self-dismemberment.
The essays are not quite as disturbing, but still not what I would call funny. Even Santaland, which is one of the author's most famous pieces, was never one of my favorites. But most people find that one fall down funny. I don't get it.
Maybe I don't get it because I can't join the Christmas -is-the-most-depressing-time-of-year mentality. I mean, it's not like my favorite time of year, but I think we've all become a little too dramatic about how depressing we think the holidays are.
I'm starting to think I'm a freak just because I can accept the holidays as another day, and I don't spend the rest of the year either dreading them, plotting against them, or harassing people who say Happy Holidays as opposed to Merry Christmas. Times are weird.
Six in all, the pieces are a mix of essays and short stories. The short stories include baby murder and intentional self-dismemberment.
The essays are not quite as disturbing, but still not what I would call funny. Even Santaland, which is one of the author's most famous pieces, was never one of my favorites. But most people find that one fall down funny. I don't get it.
Maybe I don't get it because I can't join the Christmas -is-the-most-depressing-time-of-year mentality. I mean, it's not like my favorite time of year, but I think we've all become a little too dramatic about how depressing we think the holidays are.
I'm starting to think I'm a freak just because I can accept the holidays as another day, and I don't spend the rest of the year either dreading them, plotting against them, or harassing people who say Happy Holidays as opposed to Merry Christmas. Times are weird.
Slate's audio book club did a review of Philip's Roth's Everyman. One of the commentators said that John Updike had tackled "the same issue" in Villages and had done a better job. The issue was a man who narrates his life as a series of sexual conquests.
I really enjoyed Everyman. It was my first experience with Roth and I found the story rather poignant and haunting. Villages was my first experience with Updike as well. Whereas I was able to sympathize with Roth's protagonist, there was nothing to like about Updike's main character who learns nothing by the end and neither has the reader.
I really enjoyed Everyman. It was my first experience with Roth and I found the story rather poignant and haunting. Villages was my first experience with Updike as well. Whereas I was able to sympathize with Roth's protagonist, there was nothing to like about Updike's main character who learns nothing by the end and neither has the reader.
I picked this one up because it was short. Roth is one of those author's that I have on my mental to read list. This was perhaps not the best one to start with, but I did enjoy it enough to want to read some of his other works in the near future.
The book has some themes that I always find fascinating. Can people truly be monogamous? Is it really more satisfying to live an artist's life? Generally, does love keep you safe or help you make mistakes? Is progress connecting us or driving us apart?
At least in this book the answers are mostly negative. The unnamed, main character is dead at the book's opening and then we see his life mainly through his many hospital stays and his relationships with women.
The main character makes many mistakes, alienates those in his life, and doubts himself inwardly. It is interesting to note that his father and brother chose a 9 to 5 lifestyle and were happy all round and physically healthy.
On the flip side, the main character wants to be an artist his whole life. When he retires from advertising he finds that there is little long term pleasure in painting. And he soon feels he has no more inspiration for it. The artist's life is so often romanticized that it was nice to see the "boring" people end up with some happiness, at least this time.
The book has some themes that I always find fascinating. Can people truly be monogamous? Is it really more satisfying to live an artist's life? Generally, does love keep you safe or help you make mistakes? Is progress connecting us or driving us apart?
At least in this book the answers are mostly negative. The unnamed, main character is dead at the book's opening and then we see his life mainly through his many hospital stays and his relationships with women.
The main character makes many mistakes, alienates those in his life, and doubts himself inwardly. It is interesting to note that his father and brother chose a 9 to 5 lifestyle and were happy all round and physically healthy.
On the flip side, the main character wants to be an artist his whole life. When he retires from advertising he finds that there is little long term pleasure in painting. And he soon feels he has no more inspiration for it. The artist's life is so often romanticized that it was nice to see the "boring" people end up with some happiness, at least this time.
As I've been really interested in the topic of food this year, it was good to read something like this. It felt like a bit of a recap of my year.
This is the most no-nonsense book about food I've ever read. And there are a lot of kernels within to chew on.
Instead of talking about what foods you should not eat, he talks about our overall relationship to food. Such a simple thing, but something you never hear from nutritionists.
One part that stuck out for me was when he said that a person's hunger goes down once he/she stops eating processed, refined, and fried foods. While common wisdom is that those foods cause you to crave more of them, Pollan suggests that it's the opposite. In fact, your body may be craving nutrients you are not getting enough of, so you feel hungrier. But you eat the same processed, refined, and fried foods instead of fruits and vegetables, so your body keeps telling you that you are hungry. It's a vicious cycle then.
The book's mantra is simply: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. What could be better advice than that? He also says you should never eat anything your grandmother would not recognize as food. When I think about my grandmother's relationship to food and then I think about my husband's teenage nieces' relationship to food, it is like worlds apart. She made and grew everything she ate. Today's kids go to Dunkin Donuts as their first thought when they get hungry. I'm just not sure there is a way to reconcile today's eating habits with what we have forgotten from the past. How much longer can Americans really live in this snack food lifestyle?
This is the most no-nonsense book about food I've ever read. And there are a lot of kernels within to chew on.
Instead of talking about what foods you should not eat, he talks about our overall relationship to food. Such a simple thing, but something you never hear from nutritionists.
One part that stuck out for me was when he said that a person's hunger goes down once he/she stops eating processed, refined, and fried foods. While common wisdom is that those foods cause you to crave more of them, Pollan suggests that it's the opposite. In fact, your body may be craving nutrients you are not getting enough of, so you feel hungrier. But you eat the same processed, refined, and fried foods instead of fruits and vegetables, so your body keeps telling you that you are hungry. It's a vicious cycle then.
The book's mantra is simply: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. What could be better advice than that? He also says you should never eat anything your grandmother would not recognize as food. When I think about my grandmother's relationship to food and then I think about my husband's teenage nieces' relationship to food, it is like worlds apart. She made and grew everything she ate. Today's kids go to Dunkin Donuts as their first thought when they get hungry. I'm just not sure there is a way to reconcile today's eating habits with what we have forgotten from the past. How much longer can Americans really live in this snack food lifestyle?
Of Mice and Men is about poverty and loneliness. And people have written a lot about both themes. But there is another theme as well. Two guys with nothing in common form a friendship and stick together. Other characters find it suspect because guys usually travel alone from one ranch to another without forming any authentic relationships or bonds.
But George and Lenny, the main characters they know life, even a life of extreme poverty, is a little bit better with a friend. Or, at least, George knows that. The reader is never sure how much Lenny really understands.
As a testament to friendship this book is more than just tragic. It's heartbreaking yet beautiful.
As as aside, this is another book that really should not be taught in high school. It's too complicated for kids to understand. They just haven't lived long enough.
And I wonder how many other Lost fans read this book and image George as Sawyer from Lost. I just couldn't stop doing that. Really, I wonder if his character wasn't at least partially inspired by George's tough guy exterior but heart of gold interior.
But George and Lenny, the main characters they know life, even a life of extreme poverty, is a little bit better with a friend. Or, at least, George knows that. The reader is never sure how much Lenny really understands.
As a testament to friendship this book is more than just tragic. It's heartbreaking yet beautiful.
As as aside, this is another book that really should not be taught in high school. It's too complicated for kids to understand. They just haven't lived long enough.
And I wonder how many other Lost fans read this book and image George as Sawyer from Lost. I just couldn't stop doing that. Really, I wonder if his character wasn't at least partially inspired by George's tough guy exterior but heart of gold interior.
The Book Thief is by no means a feel-good book. It's hard to imagine a book about Nazi Germany could be anything but depressing. Throw in the fact that the book is narrated by Death, and you can understand why so many people say they cried their way through the last part of this book.
When I think about books and movies about the Holocaust I think of the stories being told from the point of view of the Jewish citizens mostly. It makes sense, as they were obviously the ones who suffered the most. But this book made me question that assumption a bit.
The family in this this story are not those in the concentration camps, not those hiding in an attic, not the Nazis themselves. They are just ordinary, average citizens living in Nazi Germany.
I have often wondered what it would have been like to see people being marched to death camps and others being whipped in the streets. How could those people have gone along with it all? Take a pinch of conformity, a dash of fear, and bake it really slowly. That's how it can happen.
Some have said Death as narrator is a bit hokey or pretentious, but really it's rather inspired. Who else could be an objective narrator of such a tale?
When I think about books and movies about the Holocaust I think of the stories being told from the point of view of the Jewish citizens mostly. It makes sense, as they were obviously the ones who suffered the most. But this book made me question that assumption a bit.
The family in this this story are not those in the concentration camps, not those hiding in an attic, not the Nazis themselves. They are just ordinary, average citizens living in Nazi Germany.
I have often wondered what it would have been like to see people being marched to death camps and others being whipped in the streets. How could those people have gone along with it all? Take a pinch of conformity, a dash of fear, and bake it really slowly. That's how it can happen.
Some have said Death as narrator is a bit hokey or pretentious, but really it's rather inspired. Who else could be an objective narrator of such a tale?
