I had a great time in Philadelphia - I wasn't sure what I was expecting but it was much prettier than I expected . . . this might have to do with the fact that while I know important history occurred in Philadelphia, I also tend to think of sky scrapers when I think of the sky line, simply based on post cards. Therefore, I wasn't really expecting it to be quite as nice or varied architecturally as it was.
I meant to do an extensive post last night but my computer was acting up again and refused to turn on until this morning. I loved the Philadelphia Museum of Art - great collection, great set up, just wow. Also, I was very happy to discover the Rodin Museum in Philadelphia, and it was only a block away from my hotel. I have three framed prints of Rodin sculptures hanging in my bedroom. Well, had and will have, more accurately. For anyone interested, I have The Kiss, Eternal Spring and Hands/The Cathedrale. So obviously, I was very excited about that.
Also, just randomly, because I thought it was ironic - I ended up going to the National Liberty Museum, and I definitely enjoyed the art and glass sculptures in that museum; mostly, however, I was very amused with the fact that when I first walked by it, there was a man being arrested in front of it . . . Yes, I am easily amused, and maybe if I traveled with people they would have to hear these comments instead of the internet having to deal with them. I would like to do a post later and write about my trip a little it more, but knowing me, that may or may not happen . . . Anyway, off to Boston now.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Book 67: The Angel's Game
The Angel's Game by Carlos Ruiz Zafon
I absolutely loved Zafon's The Shadow of the Wind, and was anxiously waiting for this novel to be released in paperback. Chronologically, it can be seen as a prequel to The Shadow of the Wind but neither novel requires that the reader be familiar with the other one or even read them in the certain order. The main connection between the two is the Cemetery of Forgotten Books, and the Sempere family and their bookstore make an appearance (however, since this takes place in the 1920s and '30s, Daniel is, of course, not in it).
While The Shadow of the Wind had its dark moments, my vague memories of it still remember it as having a "happy" ending of sorts. This novel is much darker, and ends with despair. This has very much to do with the narrator - if The Shadow of the Wind is about a young boy/man that becomes interested in a man's tragic story, this novel is narrated by a man experiencing a tragic love story. It makes for a very different view being on the outside looking in vs. being the one actually dealing with the heartbreak and drama.
The main character and narrator, David, grew up poor but while working at a newspaper, first as an errand boy, he finds a mentor and friend in the rich Vidal, who helps him gain his foot in the door to write stories. Soon, David has a book contract for trashy, pulp fiction novels and though it isn't quite what he wants to be doing, he enjoys it enough, even if the woman he loves disapproves. He is able to buy a house that has long fascinated him, and lives there for years before finally becoming more interested in its history.
As a young boy, he also forged a relationship with a local bookseller, Sempere, and eventually visits the Cemetery of Forgotten Books, picking up an unfinished book that appears to be some type of book of the dead. Eventually, he notes a connection between this book and his house, and finds that there are some very odd occurences that cannot be entirely coincidental.
At some point, it starts becoming difficult to tell who and what to trust - are there supernatural forces at stake or is the narrator lying to himself, and the readers? I have a tendency to want to believe the narrator, but especially in retrospect, it becomes harder to believe in him. Although I sided with him while I was reading it - those European and South American writers do tend to be more likely to use magic realism than us Americans, after all.
I absolutely loved Zafon's The Shadow of the Wind, and was anxiously waiting for this novel to be released in paperback. Chronologically, it can be seen as a prequel to The Shadow of the Wind but neither novel requires that the reader be familiar with the other one or even read them in the certain order. The main connection between the two is the Cemetery of Forgotten Books, and the Sempere family and their bookstore make an appearance (however, since this takes place in the 1920s and '30s, Daniel is, of course, not in it).
While The Shadow of the Wind had its dark moments, my vague memories of it still remember it as having a "happy" ending of sorts. This novel is much darker, and ends with despair. This has very much to do with the narrator - if The Shadow of the Wind is about a young boy/man that becomes interested in a man's tragic story, this novel is narrated by a man experiencing a tragic love story. It makes for a very different view being on the outside looking in vs. being the one actually dealing with the heartbreak and drama.
The main character and narrator, David, grew up poor but while working at a newspaper, first as an errand boy, he finds a mentor and friend in the rich Vidal, who helps him gain his foot in the door to write stories. Soon, David has a book contract for trashy, pulp fiction novels and though it isn't quite what he wants to be doing, he enjoys it enough, even if the woman he loves disapproves. He is able to buy a house that has long fascinated him, and lives there for years before finally becoming more interested in its history.
As a young boy, he also forged a relationship with a local bookseller, Sempere, and eventually visits the Cemetery of Forgotten Books, picking up an unfinished book that appears to be some type of book of the dead. Eventually, he notes a connection between this book and his house, and finds that there are some very odd occurences that cannot be entirely coincidental.
At some point, it starts becoming difficult to tell who and what to trust - are there supernatural forces at stake or is the narrator lying to himself, and the readers? I have a tendency to want to believe the narrator, but especially in retrospect, it becomes harder to believe in him. Although I sided with him while I was reading it - those European and South American writers do tend to be more likely to use magic realism than us Americans, after all.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Some Thoughts on Friendship
I've been in kind of a weird mood lately . . . or maybe now that I'm getting ready to return to a life of real responsibilities and challenges, I'm starting to return to my default mood of depressed and cynical with feelings of inadequacy and mediocrity. Of course, I'm mostly kidding. I don't really vent or rant on this blog too often for several reasons (one being the whole "what if my Soldiers read this" issue), one of the main ones being that if I use my blog to deal with a bad mood, I'm afraid my parents will take it too seriously and start worrying when it's really just a passing feeling. Sometimes, I'm just having a bad day and need to share. Doesn't mean anything needs to be read into it (Dad!).
I graduated from my course at the beginning of July, and officially signed out of my unit yesterday. Over the last six months, I've met quite a few new people and saw others from previous military experiences again, including college ROTC, LDAC (otherwise known as that summer camp thing between junior and senior year of college), TBOLC (my LT course) and even my deployment (not that I recognized the guy - he was the one who started the game of "where do I know who from" which in the Army usually involves questions like, where were you stationed, when did you go to this Army school, when were you deployed, where were you deployed to, why the hell do you look familiar then). We definitely had fun and all but now that we're all leaving and going our separate ways, I've been thinking about the concept of friendship and how it's changed.
Obviously, when I'm out with a group of people, I'll usually say things like "oh, I'm here with my friends" or "my friends and I are going to Busch Gardens this weekend" but when it really comes down to it, I'm not sure how much I'll really keep in touch with these people once I leave. It seems like I made a bunch of good acquaintances with the potential for friends but I'm not sure if I'd quite use that term.
And I'm not sure if I just define the word friend a little more strictly than others, or if it's just that I'm less open to new long-term relationships of any kind. I remember I used to be somewhat good at keeping in touch with people - when we moved to Washington after I finished 7th grade, I continued to talk to my friend Daniel for years. When we left Seattle for Illinois between my freshmen and sophomore year, I kept in touch with my friend Stephanie until after college graduation, though we were definitely drifting that final year. While I am Facebook friends with a few people from high school, I don't actually speak to any of them anymore. I only still really maintain ties with two friends from college (and two former professors), one of whom is my best friend and the other obviously rather close. I still regularly speak to about two of the people from my LT course (not including the ones that just attended this past course with me because obviously, that didn't require actual effort). Even the people I was just in Germany with, I haven't really spoken to in quite a while. Can I blame the fact that I don't have an international calling plan?
Although given today's technology, it can also be rather weird. For example, my friends from Germany, while I haven't actually emailed them or spoken to them in months, I still kind of know a bit about what's going on in their lives due to FB and their blogs. And we comment on each other's statuses and updates. But it's definitely not the same thing as actually talking to them. And FB is great for keeping in touch with people to an extent, but at some point, reading status updates doesn't actually stand in for a relationship or friendship.
I guess I've just been thinking about the nature of friendships and how it's changed over the years. My best friend and I met move-in day of our freshmen year of college, and basically saw each other every day for the next two years (she did some other stuff her junior year). And would talk to each other online almost daily as well. We definitely don't do that anymore. We tend to text now more than anything else. Or chat over gmail. However, due to that original intimacy, we are still very close (despite one major fight and falling out - I cannot live with friends at all). I've told her quite a few things that I haven't told anyone else. Or gone into more detail about it than with others. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like it's almost impossible to build close friendships like that now . . . they probably just take a lot more time to develop now with age. It also just seems like at this point in life, most people have their best friends and their support systems, and while they aren't going to say no to more friends, that type of intensity (seeing each other on a daily basis, talking on the phone etc.) is really reserved more for significant others and dating. I might be talking out of my ass on that one though - I haven't been on a date in like three years so I wouldn't know.
I'm not saying that I don't want to keep in touch with these people but I'm just not sure if it will quite happen. As much as I like them, I'm not at the point either where I feel like I would tell them anything. Not that I feel they'd judge necessarily, but as a friend of mine put it: we've become more guarded. As I said, FB can be a great tool, but I think it can also give the false illusion that you're keeping up with people when really, you're just reading their updates and forgetting to add in that whole human interaction bit.
I'm not really sure where I'm going with this but it's on my mind at the moment. And blogging is so much more fun than cleaning my apartment or sorting through my clothes to determine what I'll be wearing in the next week and is therefore going in the small bag vs. the big suitcase.
I graduated from my course at the beginning of July, and officially signed out of my unit yesterday. Over the last six months, I've met quite a few new people and saw others from previous military experiences again, including college ROTC, LDAC (otherwise known as that summer camp thing between junior and senior year of college), TBOLC (my LT course) and even my deployment (not that I recognized the guy - he was the one who started the game of "where do I know who from" which in the Army usually involves questions like, where were you stationed, when did you go to this Army school, when were you deployed, where were you deployed to, why the hell do you look familiar then). We definitely had fun and all but now that we're all leaving and going our separate ways, I've been thinking about the concept of friendship and how it's changed.
Obviously, when I'm out with a group of people, I'll usually say things like "oh, I'm here with my friends" or "my friends and I are going to Busch Gardens this weekend" but when it really comes down to it, I'm not sure how much I'll really keep in touch with these people once I leave. It seems like I made a bunch of good acquaintances with the potential for friends but I'm not sure if I'd quite use that term.
And I'm not sure if I just define the word friend a little more strictly than others, or if it's just that I'm less open to new long-term relationships of any kind. I remember I used to be somewhat good at keeping in touch with people - when we moved to Washington after I finished 7th grade, I continued to talk to my friend Daniel for years. When we left Seattle for Illinois between my freshmen and sophomore year, I kept in touch with my friend Stephanie until after college graduation, though we were definitely drifting that final year. While I am Facebook friends with a few people from high school, I don't actually speak to any of them anymore. I only still really maintain ties with two friends from college (and two former professors), one of whom is my best friend and the other obviously rather close. I still regularly speak to about two of the people from my LT course (not including the ones that just attended this past course with me because obviously, that didn't require actual effort). Even the people I was just in Germany with, I haven't really spoken to in quite a while. Can I blame the fact that I don't have an international calling plan?
Although given today's technology, it can also be rather weird. For example, my friends from Germany, while I haven't actually emailed them or spoken to them in months, I still kind of know a bit about what's going on in their lives due to FB and their blogs. And we comment on each other's statuses and updates. But it's definitely not the same thing as actually talking to them. And FB is great for keeping in touch with people to an extent, but at some point, reading status updates doesn't actually stand in for a relationship or friendship.
I guess I've just been thinking about the nature of friendships and how it's changed over the years. My best friend and I met move-in day of our freshmen year of college, and basically saw each other every day for the next two years (she did some other stuff her junior year). And would talk to each other online almost daily as well. We definitely don't do that anymore. We tend to text now more than anything else. Or chat over gmail. However, due to that original intimacy, we are still very close (despite one major fight and falling out - I cannot live with friends at all). I've told her quite a few things that I haven't told anyone else. Or gone into more detail about it than with others. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like it's almost impossible to build close friendships like that now . . . they probably just take a lot more time to develop now with age. It also just seems like at this point in life, most people have their best friends and their support systems, and while they aren't going to say no to more friends, that type of intensity (seeing each other on a daily basis, talking on the phone etc.) is really reserved more for significant others and dating. I might be talking out of my ass on that one though - I haven't been on a date in like three years so I wouldn't know.
I'm not saying that I don't want to keep in touch with these people but I'm just not sure if it will quite happen. As much as I like them, I'm not at the point either where I feel like I would tell them anything. Not that I feel they'd judge necessarily, but as a friend of mine put it: we've become more guarded. As I said, FB can be a great tool, but I think it can also give the false illusion that you're keeping up with people when really, you're just reading their updates and forgetting to add in that whole human interaction bit.
I'm not really sure where I'm going with this but it's on my mind at the moment. And blogging is so much more fun than cleaning my apartment or sorting through my clothes to determine what I'll be wearing in the next week and is therefore going in the small bag vs. the big suitcase.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Book 66: Furies of Calderon
Furies of Calderon by Jim Butcher
Having read all of the currently available novels in The Dresden Files, I decided to turn to Butcher's other series, The Codex Alera. While the writing and the characters are definitely what I would expect from Butcher, it is a very different series than his other, probably more famous one. This is more along the lines of the traditional or stereotypical fantasy, taking place in another world with different types of species and focusing on people that have powers over different types of spirits, such as water, wood, earth, air, fire and metal furies. Also, unlike The Dresden Files, this novel is told from the third person limited rather than first person. As a result, Butcher is able to focus on several different characters, such as Amara, a cursor (basically, a government agent and spy), her former teacher Fidelias, Isana and her nephew Tavi. While all of these characters get their time, Tavi is definitely the main character of the novel, and the series. Tavi, a fifteen year old who is rather small for his age, does not have the ability to manifest or use furies and is the only person in the realm who has this "disability." Given that Butcher's other series is about a wizard in a world of normal humans, it makes sense that in his series about humans with supernatural abilities, his main character would be the one person who does not have them.
The novel begins with Amara and Fidelias on a recon mission to determine whether some of the lords of the realm are indeed plotting against the ruler (who is aging and heirless since his son died in a war 15 years before). They indeed stumble across an army, except Amara finds herself betrayed by her mentor. Tavi, meanwhile, lives in the harsher north area and while searching for his herd of sheep with his uncle discovers Marat warriors in the woods. The last war, in which the heir to the throne died, was a Marat so this isn't exactly a good thing. After Amara escapes the enemy camp, the Princep sends her north to Tavi's family's holdstead. The Marat are involved with the traitors, and Tavi and his family finds themselves in a crucial position as the possibility of a war is all too likely.
While Butcher does a very good job of creating a self-contained story, he also gives enough hints about other events to make it a good set-up for a series. Not everything is as it seems, but Butcher doesn't hit you over the head with it to the point where it becomes distracting - instead it allows the reader to entertain a few theories, and also be interested in how the overall arc of the series is going to turn out.
Having read all of the currently available novels in The Dresden Files, I decided to turn to Butcher's other series, The Codex Alera. While the writing and the characters are definitely what I would expect from Butcher, it is a very different series than his other, probably more famous one. This is more along the lines of the traditional or stereotypical fantasy, taking place in another world with different types of species and focusing on people that have powers over different types of spirits, such as water, wood, earth, air, fire and metal furies. Also, unlike The Dresden Files, this novel is told from the third person limited rather than first person. As a result, Butcher is able to focus on several different characters, such as Amara, a cursor (basically, a government agent and spy), her former teacher Fidelias, Isana and her nephew Tavi. While all of these characters get their time, Tavi is definitely the main character of the novel, and the series. Tavi, a fifteen year old who is rather small for his age, does not have the ability to manifest or use furies and is the only person in the realm who has this "disability." Given that Butcher's other series is about a wizard in a world of normal humans, it makes sense that in his series about humans with supernatural abilities, his main character would be the one person who does not have them.
The novel begins with Amara and Fidelias on a recon mission to determine whether some of the lords of the realm are indeed plotting against the ruler (who is aging and heirless since his son died in a war 15 years before). They indeed stumble across an army, except Amara finds herself betrayed by her mentor. Tavi, meanwhile, lives in the harsher north area and while searching for his herd of sheep with his uncle discovers Marat warriors in the woods. The last war, in which the heir to the throne died, was a Marat so this isn't exactly a good thing. After Amara escapes the enemy camp, the Princep sends her north to Tavi's family's holdstead. The Marat are involved with the traitors, and Tavi and his family finds themselves in a crucial position as the possibility of a war is all too likely.
While Butcher does a very good job of creating a self-contained story, he also gives enough hints about other events to make it a good set-up for a series. Not everything is as it seems, but Butcher doesn't hit you over the head with it to the point where it becomes distracting - instead it allows the reader to entertain a few theories, and also be interested in how the overall arc of the series is going to turn out.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Book 65: Commencement
Commencement by J. Courtney Sullivan
I really enjoyed this novel - it was really what would probably be described as the perfect summer read: it's light without being vapid and actually portrays characters in a rather realistic manner. While it could easily be described as chick lit since most novels that revolve around women in their 20s are automatically labeled as chick lit (and I for one don't think chick lit is necessarily a bad thing but it is rather looked down on as a genre, and even some of the novels that are deeper are quickly lumped in with the ones that are rather shallow and generic), it's definitely a feminist version of chick lit. Of course, since I originally heard about this novel over at Feministing, that makes sense.
The novel begins with a wedding at Smith College four years after four best friends graduated from the women's school. From this point, Sullivan spends some time explaining the history on how April, Celia, Bree and Sally became friends at Smith despite their varying personalities and social backgrounds. For the most part, all the women's lives have taken very different turns than expected from both the beginning of their freshmen year and even since graduating college. Bree, the former Southern belle, is a lawyer in California with a girlfriend and Sally, who always wanted to be a doctor and was in ways the most driven of the group, has delayed med school.
The women have drifted apart since graduation as becomes apparent during an argument the evening before Sally's wedding. I liked the way Sullivan portrayed the characters, and the life choices they made. The small resentments the women had toward each other on occasion as well as the judgements wrapped within supportive friendships made sense to me and seemed realistic - even though all her friends were supportive of Sally's marriage for example, they also didn't necessarily feel like the guy was good enough for her and felt at other times that Sally was acting as if she had everything figured out while they were still working on it. I don't think it would be realistic for them not to judge each other's choices on occasion, even if in the end, they are still each other's support system.
I also enjoyed that Sullivan didn't wrap the ending up nicely and have everyone get what they wanted - there are definitely questions about the future, and difficult decisions that have been made or still need to be made. There were some amusing bits in the story as well, and I'd definitely recommend it. As I said, I didn't have to concentrate too much but I also didn't feel like I was losing brain cells by reading it.
I really enjoyed this novel - it was really what would probably be described as the perfect summer read: it's light without being vapid and actually portrays characters in a rather realistic manner. While it could easily be described as chick lit since most novels that revolve around women in their 20s are automatically labeled as chick lit (and I for one don't think chick lit is necessarily a bad thing but it is rather looked down on as a genre, and even some of the novels that are deeper are quickly lumped in with the ones that are rather shallow and generic), it's definitely a feminist version of chick lit. Of course, since I originally heard about this novel over at Feministing, that makes sense.
The novel begins with a wedding at Smith College four years after four best friends graduated from the women's school. From this point, Sullivan spends some time explaining the history on how April, Celia, Bree and Sally became friends at Smith despite their varying personalities and social backgrounds. For the most part, all the women's lives have taken very different turns than expected from both the beginning of their freshmen year and even since graduating college. Bree, the former Southern belle, is a lawyer in California with a girlfriend and Sally, who always wanted to be a doctor and was in ways the most driven of the group, has delayed med school.
The women have drifted apart since graduation as becomes apparent during an argument the evening before Sally's wedding. I liked the way Sullivan portrayed the characters, and the life choices they made. The small resentments the women had toward each other on occasion as well as the judgements wrapped within supportive friendships made sense to me and seemed realistic - even though all her friends were supportive of Sally's marriage for example, they also didn't necessarily feel like the guy was good enough for her and felt at other times that Sally was acting as if she had everything figured out while they were still working on it. I don't think it would be realistic for them not to judge each other's choices on occasion, even if in the end, they are still each other's support system.
I also enjoyed that Sullivan didn't wrap the ending up nicely and have everyone get what they wanted - there are definitely questions about the future, and difficult decisions that have been made or still need to be made. There were some amusing bits in the story as well, and I'd definitely recommend it. As I said, I didn't have to concentrate too much but I also didn't feel like I was losing brain cells by reading it.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Book 64: My Horizontal Life
My Horizontal Life: A Collection of One-Night Stands by Chelsea Handler
I decided it might be time to switch up my reading a little bit since I'd been having a hard time focusing on the types of books I usually read. From what little I've seen of reactions towards Handler online, it seems like people tend to either really like her or hate her.
Overall, it was a quick and forgettable read. There were definitely a few times I laughed out loud at some of her comments and the situations she got herself into, and other times, that I kind of judged her (such as all her partying while living off unemployment). However, one thing in her favor, is that Handler definitely doesn't try to portray herself in a favorable light or to get everyone's sympathy. She wants to tell an entertaining story but she's not sharing any of this to get pity or to make people think that she's likable. I know one complaint that I've noticed about several of the more fluffy types of memoirs is that the people writing them tend to sound horribly self-centered and egotistical but still want everyone to love them.
Actually, considering the title, I was surprised by how unsuccessful most of the one-night stands were - then again, I guess those don't make for funny stories. I'm having a hard time remembering any stories specifically other than the very first one which was about a dare her sister challenged her to as children. I doubt I'd buy another one of her books but I would read it if I got a free copy somehow.
I decided it might be time to switch up my reading a little bit since I'd been having a hard time focusing on the types of books I usually read. From what little I've seen of reactions towards Handler online, it seems like people tend to either really like her or hate her.
Overall, it was a quick and forgettable read. There were definitely a few times I laughed out loud at some of her comments and the situations she got herself into, and other times, that I kind of judged her (such as all her partying while living off unemployment). However, one thing in her favor, is that Handler definitely doesn't try to portray herself in a favorable light or to get everyone's sympathy. She wants to tell an entertaining story but she's not sharing any of this to get pity or to make people think that she's likable. I know one complaint that I've noticed about several of the more fluffy types of memoirs is that the people writing them tend to sound horribly self-centered and egotistical but still want everyone to love them.
Actually, considering the title, I was surprised by how unsuccessful most of the one-night stands were - then again, I guess those don't make for funny stories. I'm having a hard time remembering any stories specifically other than the very first one which was about a dare her sister challenged her to as children. I doubt I'd buy another one of her books but I would read it if I got a free copy somehow.
Book 63: Sacred Hearts
Sacred Hearts by Sarah Dunant
It seems like I keep picking up novels by authors that I've enjoyed before and being disappointed. Sarah Dunant has written a few historical novels set in Renaissance Italy, and the first, The Birth of Venus, was very good - it was entertaining, had some scandal, and it seemed well researched.
This novel is also set in Renaissance Italy, and the plot, at least as described on the back cover, sounded promising. It takes place in a convent, and many of the women in the convent are there not because of their extreme religious devotion but because it was cheaper than marrying them off. The newest novice, Serafina, is there due to a forbidden romance. Throw in some political intrigue within the convent itself, and it seems like all the ingredients are there for a fun read, even if not a masterpiece. Unfortunately, the most I can say about this novel is that it was boring.
It was obviously well-researched but it was just lacking something. When promised forbidden love, I want some sex, dammit, not memories of chaste kisses! What the hell? Also for a novel that was said to be about women that were in a convent to pursue their own interests and not due to their faith, there was way too much talk about God and Bible-verse-citing. Yes, yes, I know, Renaissance Italy, people were more pious but I was still disappointed. The thing is there is a good story hidden in this novel, even if it is entirely predictable but the pacing was just off. It felt like Dunant spent so much time doing research that she wanted to describe everything but forgot to have anything of essence happen for the first half of the novel. And as I said, the forbidden love was just boring. It worked so much better in The Birth of Venus but that was probably because the reader actually got to see the object of desire in that novel rather than just hear about how devoted he was.
It seems like I keep picking up novels by authors that I've enjoyed before and being disappointed. Sarah Dunant has written a few historical novels set in Renaissance Italy, and the first, The Birth of Venus, was very good - it was entertaining, had some scandal, and it seemed well researched.
This novel is also set in Renaissance Italy, and the plot, at least as described on the back cover, sounded promising. It takes place in a convent, and many of the women in the convent are there not because of their extreme religious devotion but because it was cheaper than marrying them off. The newest novice, Serafina, is there due to a forbidden romance. Throw in some political intrigue within the convent itself, and it seems like all the ingredients are there for a fun read, even if not a masterpiece. Unfortunately, the most I can say about this novel is that it was boring.
It was obviously well-researched but it was just lacking something. When promised forbidden love, I want some sex, dammit, not memories of chaste kisses! What the hell? Also for a novel that was said to be about women that were in a convent to pursue their own interests and not due to their faith, there was way too much talk about God and Bible-verse-citing. Yes, yes, I know, Renaissance Italy, people were more pious but I was still disappointed. The thing is there is a good story hidden in this novel, even if it is entirely predictable but the pacing was just off. It felt like Dunant spent so much time doing research that she wanted to describe everything but forgot to have anything of essence happen for the first half of the novel. And as I said, the forbidden love was just boring. It worked so much better in The Birth of Venus but that was probably because the reader actually got to see the object of desire in that novel rather than just hear about how devoted he was.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)