Category Archives: 52 Books in 52 Weeks

Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë

Posted on by
19

“1801 – I have just returned from a visit to my landlord – the solitary neighbour that I shall be troubled with.”

Read-along posts:  Chapters 1-9 / Chapters 10-17 / Chapters 18-26 / Chapters 27-34

I didn’t expect to love this book.  I had been avoiding it for years with just a vague feeling that it wouldn’t live up to expectations.  Then Maggie came along with her January Read-Along and I knew it was the impetus I needed to read it.  Honestly, I am glad I did read it but it turned out pretty much as I expected.  It’s certainly not a terrible book, far from it …… it has high drama, passion, tension, shock and best of all, it is very well-written.  Yet on the other hand, it is romanticized and highly sentimental with dialogue such as:

“Oh!” he sobbed, “I cannot bear it!  Catherine, Catherine, I’m a traitor, too and I dare not tell you!  But leave me and I shall be killed!  Dear Catherine, my life is in your hands; and you have said you loved me — and if you did, it wouldn’t harm you.  You’ll not go, then?  kind, sweet, good Catherine!  And perhaps you will consent —- and he’ll let me die with you!”

 

Family Tree
(source Wikipedia)

The plot is highly suspect with coincidence after coincidence, happenings such as Nelly giving in to Catherine or Heathcliff’s whims, time after time, when there is really no reason to, and in spite of the fact she is often worried about losing her position if she does.  Yet I think its worst defect is the insufficient human depth in many of the characters, as they often acted as if they were automatons with emotional buttons that get pushed whenever the authoress needed that particular emotion to drive the plot along.  Catherine swings wildly from willfulness to thoughtfulness, from vicious teasing, to caring empathy, traits that do not meld together to form a believable character.  Many of the characters suffer the same fate.

Emily Brontë was one of the three Brontë sisters who wrote under the pseudonyms Currer, Ellis and Acton Bell.  Wuthering Heights was her only novel, published a year before her death of tuberculosis at the age of thirty.  She would never learn of its success.

 

Emily Brontë
by Bramwell Brontë
source Wikipedia

While Wuthering Heights is certainly compelling and captures the reader’s attention, it does so by using devices such as twisted emotion, shocking circumstances and profoundly dramatized situations, techniques not worthy of a well-composed classic.  The writing is excellent yet the content reflects an immaturity in construction, perhaps the innocence of a sheltered young girl relating what is imagined about life without actually having the experience of living it.  Relatively juvenile plot devices were employed with perhaps a charming innocence.  Heated emotions do not necessarily mean an increase in love; and claims of sentiment which lack corresponding action are meaningless.  Is it an exciting read?  Absolutely!  Do you want to know what happens next?  Of course.  But to compare this novel to Jane Eyre is like comparing a diamond to crudely cut glass.  They are not in the same sphere.

 

The climb to Top Withens, thought
to have inspired the Earnshaw home
in Wuthering Heights
(source Wikipedia)

Now before I am too hard on poor Emily, I think her sister had brilliant insight into her sibling and the novel’s birth.

“I am bound to avow that she had scarcely more practical knowledge of the peasantry amongst whom she lived, than a nun has of the country people who sometimes pass her convent gates.  My sister’s disposition  was not naturally gregarious; circumstances favoured and fostered her tendency to seclusion; except to go to church or take a walk on the hills, she rarely crossed the threshold of home.  Though her feeling for the people round was benevolent, intercourse with them she never sought; nor, with very few exceptions, ever experienced.  And yet she knew them; knew their ways, their language, their family histories; she could hear of them with interest and talk of them with detail, minute, graphic, and accurate; but with them she barely exchanged a word.  Hence it ensued that what her mind had gathered of the real concerning them, was too exclusively confined to those tragic and terrible traits of which, in listening to the secret annals of every rude vicinage, the memory is sometimes compelled to receive the impress.  Her imagination, which was a spirit more sombre than sunny, more powerful than sportive, found in such traits material whence it wrought creations like Heathcliff, like Earnshaw, like Catherine.  Having formed these beings, she did not know what she had done.  If the auditor of her work, when read in manuscript, shuddered under the grinding influence of natures so relentless and implacable, of spirits so lost and fallen; if it was complained that the mere hearing of certain vivid and fearful scenes banished sheep by night, and disturbed mental peace by day, Ellis Bell (Emily Brontë) would wonder what was meant, and suspect the complainant of affectation.  Had she but lived, her mind would of itself have grown like a strong tree; loftier, straighter, wider-spreading, and its matured fruit would have attained a mellower ripeness and sunnier bloom; but on that mind time and experience along could work: to the influence of other intellects, it was not amenable.”

Charlotte Brontë says it so well.  Wuthering Heights is a well-written novel, but the components are but mere twigs and undeveloped buds, showing promise of growth, but not yet ready to burst into the splendour of full form.  And sadly, they never would.

 

 

David Copperfield by Charles Dickens

Posted on by
5

“Whether I shall turn out to be the hero of my own life, or whether that station will be held by anybody else, these pages must show.”

Dickens was an author who had not appealed to me in my teens so, in an effort to expand my horizons, I began to follow a book group that was reading through his works chronologically.  Since joining them, I have been able to read Martin Chuzzlewit, Dombey and Son, and my most recent read, David Copperfield.

Fatherless, David Copperfield lives with his mother and their spunky and loveable servant, Peggotty, in quiet and amiable bliss.  When his mother decides to remarry to an irascible man named Murdstone, David’s life begins an upheaval that catapults him through a variety of circumstances, both beneficial and tragic, each of his decisions mirroring his persistence, bravery, suffering and loyalty, working together to build a quiet character of strength and reliability.

The story is so vast it is impossible to write a summary that would do it justice so let’s examine some of the wonderful characters that Dickens threads throughout the narrative:

Betsey Trotwood
by Phiz
(source Wikipedia)

Betsy Trotwood, David’s aunt, appears to abandon him and his mother at the beginning of the story, yet when David needs her, she becomes a stabilizing force in his life and an excellent example with her dry wit and generous heart.

Peggotty & Barkis
by Sol Etyinge Jr. 1867
(source Victorian Web)

Peggotty, his nurse, sees David as her own and often assists him in his endeavours; a cherished substitute mother.

Daniel Peggotty
by Frank Reynolds 1910
(source Wikipedia)

Mr. Peggotty, her brother, shows unwavering devotion and heart-wrenching unconditional love to his niece, Emily, after her flight with David’s nefarious schoolfriend, Steerforth, and her obvious ruin.

Wilkins Micawber
from 1912 edition
(source Wikipedia)

Mr. Micawber, a shady, bumbling fellow, appears like an odiferous fragrance throughout David’s life, and while good intentioned, only causes trouble whenever he appears; however he ends up helping to bring about a positive resolution to a quite dire circumstance at the end of the book.

David falls for Dora
by Frank Reynolds (1910)
(source Wikipedia)

Even Dickens’ other female characters were likeable.  In many of his novels he recurrently treats the feminine nature as sacchrine, helpless and perfect.  It can get very annoying.  Yet while Dora is all of these things, somehow Dickens makes her real; this time the characterization is for a purpose and works well within the story.  I loved Dora, as well.

Dickens appears to emphasis the idea of constancy and the value of tradition.  Copperfield’s childhood home is revisited at a few points in the novel, and his aunt Trotwood, while losing her home when her money is treacherously stolen, regains it again at the conclusion of the story.  Loyalty to his friends is paramount for David, and he ensures he maintains lasting relationships with most of them throughout his lifetime.  He sees good in everyone, from his child-wife who is clinging and rather dim, to his admired school chum who, while he plummets in David’s esteem after seducing Emily, is still regarded with compassion by David.  There is a lasting emphasis on family, familiar houses from his past and the desire to remain close to the people, place and things that have made him who he is.

The River by Phiz
(source Victorian Web)

David’s Aunt Trotwood wisely states: “We must meet reverses boldly, and not suffer them to frighten us, my dear.  We must learn to act the play out.  We must live misfortune down, Trot!” and throughout the book her words are played out in David’s actions as he perseveres through misfortune, scandal and tragedy to become a devoted husband, a friend of whom anyone would be proud, and a successful writer in his own right.

Claimed to be autobiographical in nature, the novel was clearly dear to Dickens, his words reflecting his affection for it:  ” …. like many fond parents, I have in my heart of hearts a favourite child.  And his name is David Copperfield.”  A truly wonderful read!

Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf

Posted on by
13

“Mrs. Dalloway said she would buy the flowers herself.”

After reading Woolf’s To The Lighthouse I was excited to dive into Mrs. Dalloway.  Following the lead of James Joyce’s Ulysses, Woolf used the same writing style, and, in a loose imitation of Joyce, chronicles a day in the life of a prestigious middle-aged woman in London. Woolf critiqued Joyce’s Ulysses, calling it “illiterate” and “under-bred,” finding the graphic sexual fantasies and the foul language base, and saying it reeked of a “queasy under-graduate scratching his pimples.”  Was Mrs. Dalloway Woolf’s attempt to get this style of writing right?

Using her signature “stream-of-consciousness” style, Woolf chronicles one day in the life of Mrs. Richard Dalloway, the wife of a respectable, wealthy gentleman.  Set in post-World War I London, on this particular day she is preparing for a party she will host that evening, an unusual party whose guests will span the ages of her life, past and present.  As she performs her tasks, her mind wanders back through days gone by, unearthing ghosts of earlier loves, regrets, irritations, ever-present worries and satisfaction.  The reader is also privy to the thoughts of many of her friends who will be present at this party, as they perform their daily business.

As a secondary plot, we meet Septimus Warren Smith, a surviving soldier of the war, yet a hollow shell of a man, his mind barely touching reality.  In spite of the persistent yet useless intervention of his wife and doctors, he gradually is sucked into a whirlpool of despair, seemingly of his own making, and suffers a very poignant and pathetic fate.  Or does he?

Julia Stephen
Virginia Woolf’s mother
source Wikipedia
Virginia Woolf, Age 20
source Wikipedia

I’m going to go out on a limb here and offer a very unusual interpretation of at least one theme in the novel.  Woolf’s treatment of Septimus, in contrast with Mrs. Dalloway and her social peers, was very intriguing.  If we examine the thoughts of Mrs. Dalloway and her friends and acquaintances, they touch upon parties, flower-shows, scholarships, the family business, Bartlett pears, gossip and cricket.  In comparison, Septimus’ musings revolve around human nature, the truth, Evans (his friend who was killed in the war), aloneness, meaning, and the beauty of words.  Septimus is presented on the surface as a character who is emotionally unbalanced, while Mrs. Dalloway’s circle is the respected rational group.  Has Woolf turned appearance on its head?  Is the perceived deranged person really the one who is sane, and are the ones who appear “normal” actually the group who is not?  It’s an irony that’s inescapable.

For Septimus, the only liberation from a world turned upside-down was death.  Is his escape from a materialistic world concerned with trivialities an heroic act?  Woolf makes it appear so:

“…… Death was defiance.  Death was an attempt to communicate, people feeling the impossibility of reaching the centre which, mystically, evaded them; closeness drew apart; rapture faded; one was alone.  There was an embrace in death.”

Ironically, sixteen years after the writing of Mrs. Dalloway, Woolf followed Septimus into the murky fog of depression and, placing stones in the pockets of her overcoat, walked into the River Ouse near her home, drowning herself, a sad fate for one of the most respected female literary writers of the time.

Virginia Woolf – Romanian Stamp
Source Wikipedia

I just loved Woolf’s To The Lighthouse and I really wanted to like Mrs. Dalloway.  There are certain aspects I do like about it, such as the character of Septimus Warren Smith, the relentless passage of time, the allusions to various literary works of different eras, the exploration of the lingering impact of the first World War and the diminishing influence of the British empire.   The prose is lovely, light and lyrical, each sentence a candy you can pop into your mouth and taste a burst of spring.  Yet I found the story meandering and disjointed.  In To The Lighthouse, the stream-of consciousness  flowed towards one main character, Mrs. Ramsey, wrapping her in a warm glow, even while each character retained their own lively identity.  In Mrs. Dalloway, the streams flow out from Mrs. Dalloway and a host of other characters, at times to alight on each other, but many times to float out into the atmosphere, leaving the reader confused or adrift.  The lack of cohesiveness was like an irritating burr in my britches and no matter how much I tried, it was hard to ignore.  Yet, in spite of the persistent irritation, I will probably re-read this book sometime in the future.  Woolf’s books are like a deceptively packed suitcase where you’re never quite certain if you have even removed half of what is contained.

Once and Future King by T.H. White

Posted on by
10

“On Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays it was Court Hand and Summulae Logicales, while the rest of the week it was the Organon, Repetition and Astrology.”

The Once and Future King encompasses five books written by author T.H. White about the legend of King Arthur.  In The Sword and the Stone, we meet Wart, a young boy who is the ward of Sir Ector and who lives with his guardian and his guardian’s son, Kay, near the Forest Sauvage.  By an unexpected set of circumstances, he encounters the wizard, Merlyn, who becomes his and Kay’s tutor, although we can see from the beginning that Merlyn favours Wart and there is obvious foreshadowing that we should expect something extraordinary from him later in the tale.  This book concludes with Wart unknowingly pulling the sword from the stone, a clear indication that he is England’s next king.  The book The Witch in the Wood (re-written as The Queen of Air and Darkness and apparently with little resemblance to the original) follows, chronicling the establishment of Arthur’s court under the political idea of right instead of might, and, of course, the love affair between Lancelot and Guinever receives the most attention.  The third book, The Ill-Made Knight, gives primary focus to Lancelot, his quests to purge his thoughts of Guinever, his relationship to Elaine who bears him a son, the development of a odd love-triangle, the quest for the Holy Grail, and Lancelot’s fight to defend Guinever’s honour.  A Candle in the Wind waxes philosophically about the metamorphosis of England into its present condition and the ideologies of war.  The height of tension appears in this book as Lancelot and Guinever’s relationship is revealed by a dastardly plot of Arthur’s Orkney clan, a war begins and the throne is seized by a usurper.  The death of Arthur and his son, Mordred are foreshadowed.   The Book of Merlyn, published posthumously, is added at the end and sets an aged Arthur amongst Merlyn and his animal friends from Book I, as they discuss the evils of war, why men want it, and how can it be avoided.

Photo courtesy of Moyan Brenn
(source Flickr)
Creative Commons License

I’m really stumped as to where to start with reviewing this book.  My idea of the Knights of the Round Table was woven with nobility, courage, daring, self-sacrifice, self-denial and chivalric actions.  While the Arthur of this tale professes to have started the Round Table with the idea that might does not equal right, White makes Arthur a rather weak character.  In his youth, he is quite simple; Merlyn plants the social and political ideas into his head and as a reader, I never got the feeling that Arthur intrinsically believed in them himself.  He knowingly allows Lancelot and Guinever to have an illicit relationship and is often paralyzed in moments when it is necessary for a king to show his strength and decisiveness.  He is a simple, loving old soul who calls everyone “my dear” but it is a hard task to imagine him as the legendary King Arthur.  Lancelot for a good part of the book is a brooding morass of insecurity and dark thoughts.

“The boy [Lancelot] thought that there was something wrong with him.  All throughout his life — even when he was a great man with the world at his feet — he was to feel this gap:  something at the bottom of his heart of which he was aware, and ashamed, but which he did not understand ….  We do not have to dabble in a place which he preferred to keep secret.”

 However after Lancelot’s quest for the Grail and his encounter with God, he at least develops into a man with a sense of what is important in life and an internal code of conduct that he believes is worth following.  Guinever is a moderately believable character, professing her loyalty and love to both men, but White puts her through a period of womanly jealously that is almost embarrassing to read and certainly not worthy of her.  With Arthur’s half-relatives from Orkney, the devious and twisted brothers who become not only knights of the Round Table but are the poison that festers inside Arthur’s kingdom, White does a satisfying job with crafting their personalities.  At times they can be quite appalling …… perfect villains to fit the story.  Also, King Pellinore and his Questing Beast should receive an appreciative nod, adding delightful humour to the first book.

Lancelot and Guinevere (1890s)
Herbert James Draper
source Wikimedia Commons

T.H. White was a rather tortured soul.  He was beset with fears of nearly everything, except, apparently, God.  After holding the position of head of the English Department at Stowe School, he retreated to a game-keeper’s cottage at Stowe Ridings on the Stowe Estate and, with hawks, owls and a setter bitch as his only companions, he began to write.  As war loomed over England in 1938, White’s fear almost choked him.  He declared himself a conscientious objector and in February 1939 found himself lodging in a farmhouse in Doolistown, Ireland, out of harm’s way.  He remained there for the next six and a half years.  In a December 1940 letter to L.J. Potts, a former tutor at Cambridge, he wrote: “….. [The Candle in the Wind] will end on the night before the last battle, with Arthur absolutely wretched.  I am going to add a new 5th volume in which Arthur rejoins Merlyn underground ….. and the animals come back again, mainly ants and wild geese.  Don’t squirm.  The inspiration is godsent.  You see, I have suddenly discovered that (1) the central theme of Morte d’Arthur is to find an antidote for war, (2) that the best way to examine the politics of man is to observe him, with Aristotle, as a political animal …….”

The above information perhaps explains White confusing re-crafting of the legend, and the plethora of social and political philosophical concepts that twist the characters into a means of furthering the development of these ideas.  Instead of White employing creativity to show the reader various themes in the novel, he simply tells us, which leaves a very weak effect.  As one of my reading buddies stated, instead of cleverly weaving his opinions into the story, White attempts to weave the story into his opinions.  The result is sloppy and, in effect, he actually strips these noble characters of the dignity they had been given by previous writers.

The Sword in the Stone, by itself is an appealing read, a nice story about the young Arthur and his upbringing.  By the second book, the story takes a turn for the worst.  I only have two words:  very disappointing.

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald

Posted on by
10
First edition 1925 (sourced Wikipedia)

“In my younger and more vulnerable years my father gave me some advice that I’ve been turning over in my mind ever since.”

Decadence, adultery, narcissism, vast wealth, idealistic love, betrayal, death, revenge, murder; a vast array of scope for a novel, and Fitzgerald delivers an impacting tale in The Great Gatsby.  Nick Carraway, a young man from the Midwest, begins to form a relationship with his neighbour, the wealthy Jay Gatsby and eventually learns of Gatsby’s connection to his cousin, Daisy.  Daisy, who is married to Tom Buchanan, while casually enduring her husband’s adulterous relationships, has led a very vapid and frivilous life amongst the society scene of the 1920s.  When Gatsby reappears in her life, their rekindled romance sets off a series of tragic events, the repercussions reverberating through the lives of all the characters.

Gatsby, the created man; Gatsby, the idealist, a man who is love with an image that formed five years earlier, and that he has nurtured through time.  Did I understand his infatuation with Daisy?  No, but I sympathized with it.  He had grown up isolated, broke relations with his parents reasonably early on and had no one in his life to set a good example that he could draw from.  Daisy was perhaps the only person whom he had loved, and so he loved her passionately, unrealistically and terminally.  And he realized, that he would need money to keep her love.  When Nick Carraway says to him, “She’s [Daisy’s] got an indiscreet voice …. It’s full of —-“, Gatsby answers, “Her voice is full of money.”  Even though he knows what she is like, and has known from the beginning, is he desperately trying to hold on to his fantasy of her —- this illusion of perfection — because he has nothing else?  Gatsby fails to examine any of the decisions he makes in his life ……… perhaps he truly believes that money can buy him happiness and cannot see the superficiality of the life and people with whom he surrounds himself.  His life is built on illusion and throughout the novel we hear the faint ticking of the bomb that will shatter his misperceptions.

The Plaza Hotel in the early 1920s
(source Wikipedia)

As for Nick Carraway, I felt uncomfortable with him as the narrator.  He went to unusual lengths at the beginning of the novel to establish his credibility with the reader, and if his observations are to be believed, he was the only one in the novel with any compassion, discernment or standards.  While the society he moves in is portrayed in a harsh, decadent, unforgiving light, he is the angel that hovers above it, the star that shines through it.  He is the only one who cares for Gatsby, the only one with a moral compass.  I had a difficult time buying into his golden-boy image.

The tragedy of this novel is a wasted life.  In spite of the grandeur, in spite of his fame and money, Gatsby left no real lasting effect on anyone, other than perhaps Nick Carraway.  He buried himself behind a persona, only emerging to be drawn towards the flame of Daisy and then perishing, as his wings brushed the heat of her consuming light.

“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”

The Wizard of Oz by L. Frank Baum

Posted on by
4

“Dorothy lived in the midst of the great Kansas prairies, with Uncle Henry, who was a farmer, and Aunt Em, who was the farmer’s wife.”

Whether first introduced to the book or the movie, which one of us is not familiar with the story of The Wizard of Oz?  As I child, I remember feeling dizzy as Dorothy was whirled away in the cyclone to the land of Oz; those shoes she inherited from the dead Wicked Witch of the East, just dazzled; the Scarecrow who wanted a brain, the Tin Man who wanted a heart, and the Lion who wanted courage stirred my sympathies, and I was as in awe of Oz as Dorothy and her companions, until I found out, as they did, that his persona was all a hoax.  All throughout Dorothy’s adventures with the Munchkins, the Flying Monkeys, and  the Wicked Witch of the West, I cheered for Dorothy to find a means to return safely to Uncle Henry and Aunt Em and her home in Kansas.

Dorothy meets the cowardly Lion
from the first edition
(source Wikipedia)

Re-reading this book as an adult, I admit I’ve lost the delight of the childhood experience, yet I found if I focused on the story’s simplicity, there was charm in it.  Both Dorothy and her companions were straightforward, uncomplicated personalities, trusting, honest and unquestionably sincere.  In spite of the dangers they encountered, somehow their innocence and naiveté helped them pass through their trials and realize their dreams.  While the Scarecrow, the Tin Man and the Lion each desire a quality that they perceive they lack, their actions in situations of danger, show that they already possess these qualities, and that they simply had to employ them, in order for them to be revealed.  Perhaps this shows that we all have special qualities within us that only rise to the surface in the face of adversity.  
All in all, I found this a short and pleasing read, a chance to travel back to a childhood favourite and revisit memories that still linger in spite of childhood left behind.

52 Books In 52 Weeks Wrap-up 2013

Posted on by
15

While I didn’t have a blog last year, I did particiapte in the 52 Books in 52 Weeks Challenge.  Robin is the host and she encourages participants to answer questions at the end of the year, to review their reading experiences.  I admit, I haven’t completed the questions previously but, with a new blog, this year I thought I’d give it a go!

  1.  How many book did you read this year?

       I should end up with about 70 books read, which is 8 less than the
       previous year.  

  2.  Did you meet or beat your own personal goal?
     
       My personal goal was 65 books, so I beat my challenge.  

  3.  Favourite book of 2013?

       Oh, this is a difficult question.  I would say The Divine Comedy 
       because of the ambitiousness of Dante’s writing, the differences 
       between the three books and the opportunity he gives the reader
       to intimately explore Heaven, Hell and Purgatory.

  4.  Least favourite book of 2013 and why?

       I have no problem answering this!  Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier.
       The whole structure of the story seemed not only forced but poorly 
       stitched together, and the storyline shallow.  The main character’s
       husband is a murderer for really no good reason, and the only emotion
       the second Mrs. deWinter displays is joy that her husband doesn’t 
       love his first wife, the murdered Rebecca.  I know that Rebecca
       was supposed to be the force that dominates the story, I think we 
       are supposed to sympathize with Mrs. de Winter II and be chilled 
       by Mrs. Danvers but, honestly, I was ready to tear my hair out by 
       the end of the story.  Never again unless by torture!

  5.  One book you thought you’d never read and was pleasantly surprised
       that you liked it?
 
       The House of Mirth by Edith Wharton.  I thought I would like it but I never
       imagined that I would love it as much as I did.  Wharton was a master of 
       character development when she created Lily Bart.  The reader is 
       introduced to an innocent child, an accomplished flirt, a damaged
       product of society, a redeemed angel, and each of these traits shone out
       just as strongly as all the others.  Just, WOW!

  6.  One book you thought you’d love but didn’t?

       Walden Two.  I expected a good utopian read.  What I got was B.F.
       Skinner’s philosophical treatise of the perfect society, but in a way
       that was rambling and unappealing.  I didn’t feel he really made an 
       attempt to engage with the reader.

       Also, The Summer Book, by Tove Jansson.  It was a story of a girl
       who had lost her mother and was spending her time on an island off
       Finland with her grandmother, and of their relationship together.
       Jansson only mentions the mother’s death once and then doesn’t
       explore this theme further, asking us to surmise the girl’s often
       unpleasant behaviour is a result of this tragedy.  Fine, but the
       grandmother is a little off-colour too, as well as other characters in
       this  novel.  I didn’t hate it and, in fact, some parts were amusing,
       but it left me with no connection to the characters and a very uneasy
       feeling.

  7.  One book that touched you  — made you laugh, cry, sing or dance.

       Oh, lots of these!   First The House of Mirth …… my heart just ached for
       Lily, but because I’ve mentioned this title already, I’ll pick another:  All
       Quiet on the Western Front.  I found this book particularly poignant
       because, while it was realistic, it wasn’t sensationalistic.  I felt the author
       intimately knew his characters and was able to communicate their
       struggles with the reader.  As enjoyable as a book on war can be.

  8.  Any new to you authors discovered and you can’t wait to read more of
       their stories?

       I enjoyed The Master and Margarita, so I’d like to read more of Mikhail
      Bulgakov.  Oh, and Emilé Zola, absolutely.  I also enjoyed M.R. James’
      Ghost Stories.

  9.  Name the longest book you read?  The shortest?

      If I finish in time, it would be War and Peace at 1392 pages.  If not, my 
      next closest is Dombey and Son by Charles Dickens at 996 pages.  The
      shortest was Cautionary Tales for Children by Hilaire Belloc at 72 pages.

10.  Name the most unputdownable book you read?

       The Brain That Changes Itself was fascinating!

11.  Book that had the greatest impact on you this year?

       The House of Mirth by Edith Wharton.  I still think about it:  Lily’s fate
       and was it necessary?

12.  What book would you recommend everybody read?

        The Divine Comedy, The House of Mirth, Beowulf and Pride and
        Prejudice.

13.  Share your most favourite cover.

       What a lovely cover!  I speaks of adventure and makes you want to
       pick up the book and read!

     

14.  Do you have a character you fell in love with?

       Lily Bart from The House of Mirth.  A tragically loveable yet sometimes
       unlikeable character!  Also Rilla from Rilla of Ingleside, Miette from The
       Fortune of the Rougons, Antonia from My Antonia …… the list could go
       on!

15.  What was your most favourite part of the challenge?  Did you do any of
       the mini-challenges?

       I enjoy how this challenge gives me focus.  I didn’t do any of the mini-
       challenges but I’ll certainly be considering some for 2014!

My goals for 2014 are to read less books and to spend more time with the books I read.  I want to take the time to read over passages that resonate with me, be able to ponder the thoughts the book has provoked, and leave time to journal.  The beginning of the year is shaping up to be busy; I have probably too many books scheduled to read but I am feeling positive about starting the year off without many leftovers from 2013.

All the best to everyone for 2014!

Last Minute Challenges – 2014

Posted on by
8

Here are a last few challenges to squeak in before the end of the year.  Please visit the linked sites for more information about these challenges.  I hope to see some of you joining the insanity!

The 52 Books in 52 Weeks challenge is hosted by Robin, who is a very well-organized and welcoming hostess.  I’ve participated in this challenge for about 4 years now and I love the comradory that this challenge inspires.  There is a homeschool forum thread where people touch base each week with each other to discuss the books that they are reading.  An excellent challenge!

I really can’t say no to the 2014 Chunkster Challenge.  I am reading through Dickens, have Daniel Deronda scheduled for 2014, plus some history tomes …….. I will easily be able to reach at least 5-6 or more.  This past year I read 14+ chunksters, but I’m going to be less ambitious this year.

And to heighten the tension, the European Reading Challenge is going to be a new addition.  Hosted by Rose City Reader, this challenge, in one aspect, should not be difficult; I read many European books each year.  On the other hand, to read books from different European countries to reach each level will require some effort.  I am going to go-for-broke with this challenge and aim for the Five Star (Deluxe Entourage) which is 5 books by five different authors and from five different countries.

And to top off the insanity, I am joining the 2014 Shakespeare reading challenge.  I’m aiming for the “Occasional Theater-Goer” with 1 – 4 plays to read.  Two years ago, I participated in attempting to read a Shakespeare-a-month and failed.  Well, I did manage to get through about 5 months and REALLY enjoyed his plays, however, I allowed myself to get distracted.  So, once again, I need a challenge to keep me focused.  This will be my most challenging challenge.  I have so many books scheduled for 2014, but my goal has been to return to Shakespeare and I am determined to do it.  Wish me luck ~~~ I will need it!

And I probably will need valium and therapy when it is all over, but the less said about that, the better …….  😉